Juno Pharmaceuticals Inc v Juno Therapeutics Inc

Juno Pharmaceuticals Inc (the applicant) sought to register the trade mark "JUNO" in relation to pharmaceutical preparations and related services. Juno Therapeutics Inc (the respondent) opposed this application, arguing that the proposed mark was deceptively similar to its own registered trade mark "JUNO" and its associated logo, which it used in relation to a range of goods and services including cancer therapies and medical research. The matter came before the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the applicant's proposed trade mark "JUNO" was deceptively similar to the respondent's registered trade mark "JUNO" and its logo, within the meaning of section 44 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). This required the Court to consider the degree of visual, aural, and conceptual resemblance between the marks, as well as the similarity of the goods and services in relation to which they were used.

The Court applied the established principles for assessing deceptive similarity, including the "imperfect recollection" test and the consideration of the marks as a whole. It found that while the word "JUNO" was identical in both marks, the respondent's registered mark included a distinctive logo. However, the Court determined that the dominant element of the respondent's mark was the word "JUNO" and that the visual and conceptual similarities between the word marks were significant. Given the high degree of similarity between the marks and the overlap in the pharmaceutical and medical fields, the Court concluded that there was a real likelihood of deception or confusion among consumers.

The Court upheld the opposition and ordered that the applicant's trade mark application be refused.