Opposition by Owlet Baby Care Inc to registration of trade mark application number 2093522 (Class 9) – Owlet Home – in the name of Owlet Home LLC.
Case
•
[2022] ATMO 8
•14 January 2022
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Opposition by Owlet Baby Care Inc to registration of trade mark application number 2093522 (Class 9) – Owlet Home – in the name of Owlet Home LLC. [2022] ATMO 8
[2022] ATMO 8
14 January 2022
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an opposition by Owlet Baby Care Inc. (the Opponent) to the registration of trade mark application number 2093522, for the mark "Owlet Home" in Class 9, filed by Owlet Home LLC (the Applicant). The opposition was heard by Blake Knowles, Delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks.
The legal issues before the Delegate were whether the Opponent had established any of the grounds for opposition pursued under sections 42(b), 44, 58, 60, and 62A of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). The Opponent bore the burden of establishing one or more of these grounds on the balance of probabilities, with rights assessed as at the Relevant Date.
The Delegate found that the Opponent had successfully established the ground of opposition under section 60 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth) in respect of all the goods. This ground relates to the use of a trade mark that has become generally recognised in Australia as designating the goods or services of the opponent. The evidence demonstrated that the Opponent, a US-based health technology corporation, had been distributing its "Owlet" branded baby monitoring devices in Australia since April 2018, with significant online promotion and distribution through Australian retailers. As the Opponent had established a ground of opposition under section 60, it was not necessary for the Delegate to consider the other grounds relied upon.
Consequently, the Delegate decided to refuse the registration of the trade mark application. The Opponent was awarded costs against the Applicant.
The legal issues before the Delegate were whether the Opponent had established any of the grounds for opposition pursued under sections 42(b), 44, 58, 60, and 62A of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). The Opponent bore the burden of establishing one or more of these grounds on the balance of probabilities, with rights assessed as at the Relevant Date.
The Delegate found that the Opponent had successfully established the ground of opposition under section 60 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth) in respect of all the goods. This ground relates to the use of a trade mark that has become generally recognised in Australia as designating the goods or services of the opponent. The evidence demonstrated that the Opponent, a US-based health technology corporation, had been distributing its "Owlet" branded baby monitoring devices in Australia since April 2018, with significant online promotion and distribution through Australian retailers. As the Opponent had established a ground of opposition under section 60, it was not necessary for the Delegate to consider the other grounds relied upon.
Consequently, the Delegate decided to refuse the registration of the trade mark application. The Opponent was awarded costs against the Applicant.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Standing
-
Costs
-
Appeal
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
0
Pfizer Products Inc v Karam
[2006] FCA 1663
Registrar of Trade Marks v Woolworths
[1999] FCA 1020