Transcription
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. https://estta.uspto.govESTTA Tracking number:Filing date:ProceedingESTTA116354710/04/2021IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICEBEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD91234475PartyPlaintiffWestguard Insurance CompanyCorrespondenceAddressJEFFREY H KAUFMANTECHMARK GREENSTEIN LAW PC1751 PINNACLE DRIVE, SUITE 1000TYSONS, VA 22102UNITED STATESPrimary Email: jhk@techmark.com703-649-3230SubmissionBrief on Merits for PlaintiffFiler's NameJeffrey H. KaufmanFiler's emailjhk@techmark.com, ndg@techmark.comSignature/Jeffrey H Kaufman/Date10/04/2021AttachmentsOpposer WestGUARD Main Brief on the Merits 10-4-21.pdf(387401 bytes )
CERTIFICATE OF ELECTRONIC FILINGI hereby certify that the following is being filed with the TTAB via ESTTA on the date set forth below.Date: October 4, 2021/Jeffrey H. Kaufman/Attorney for OpposerAttorney Docket No.: WGRD.US.00037.LIN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICEBEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARDWestGUARD Insurance Company,Opposition No.: 91-234,475Opposer,Mark:Appln. No.:v.WorkersComp GUARD87/142,642Hanover Stone Partners, LLC,Applicant.OPPOSER’S MAIN BRIEF ON THE MERITSRespectfully submitted,WestGUARD Insurance CompanyBy: /Jeffrey H. Kaufman/Jeffrey H. KaufmanNeil D. GreensteinTechMark Greenstein Law PC1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 1000Tysons, VA 22102Tel: 703-649-3230E-Mail: jhk@techmark.comAttorneys for Opposer WestGUARD Insurance Company1
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage NoINTRODUCTION .6DESCRIPTION OF THE RECORD .6STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES.6RECITATION OF FACTS .7A.WestGUARD, Its History, Insurance Offerings and Trademarks .71.WestGUARD Operates Under the GUARD Marks, and ProvidesInsurance Offerings and Related Services in the Field of Workers’Comp .72.THE GUARD name and trademarks have been the focus and the“Identity” of Guard’s Insurance Business Notwithstanding Acquisitions,and Changes in Ownership. .93.WestGUARD’s Trademarks .114.WestGUARD’s Market Share, Recognition and Awards .135.WestGUARD’s Advertising, Promotion and Sales .14B.Hanover Stone and its WorkersComp GUARD Trademark .16LEGAL ANALYSIS.16A.Standing .16B.Priority .17C.Likelihood of Confusion .181.The Marks Are So Similar Such That Confusion Is Likely .192.The Relatedness of The Services Is High; Indeed, they Directly Overlap. .223.The Trade Channels Overlap .24D.The Services Do Not Require Careful Consideration Or Sophistication .25E.The Strength, Scope and Fame of the GUARD Marks is Great .26F.There Is No Evidence of Third-Party Marks or Use .28G.Actual Confusion Is A Non-Factor Since Appln. 87/142,642 Is Based onIntent-to-Use and Any Use In Commerce Is Minimal and Recent .29H.The Relevant Consumers Are Accustomed to Opposer Being the Sourceof Products and Services Marketed and Sold In Connection with GUARDFormative Marks .29I.Opposer is Entitled to Broad Rights to Exclude .30J.The Potential Extent of Confusion Is Substantial .31K.Other Factors .312
TABLE OF AUTHORITIESCasesPage No.Application of E. I. duPont de Nemours & Co.476 F.2d 1357, 177 U.S.P.Q. 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973) . passimBabbit Elecs., Inc. v. Dynascan Corp.38 F.3d 1161 (11th Cir. 1994) . 32Barbara’s Bakery Inc. v. Landesman82 U.S.P.Q.2d 1283 (T.T.A.B. 2008) . 16Black & Decker Corp. v. Emerson Elec. Co.84 U.S.P.Q.2d 1482 (T.T.A.B. 2007) . 19Blinded Veterans Ass’n v. Blinded Am. Veterans Found.872 F.2d 1035 (D.C. Cir. 1989) . 31Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v. Century Life of America970 F.2d 874, 23 U.S.P.Q.2d 1698 (Fed. Cir. 1992) . 20Coach Services, Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC668 F.3d 1356, 101 U.S.P.Q.2d 1713 (Fed. Cir. 2012) . 20Coca-Cola Co. v. Snow Crest Beverages, Inc.162 F.2d 280, 73 U.S.P.Q. 518 (1st Cir. 1947) . 17Cunningham v. Laser Golf Corp.222 F.3d 943, 55 U.S.P.Q.2d 1842 (Fed. Cir. 2000) . 16Dan Robbins & Assocs., Inc. v. Questor Corp.599 F.2d 1009 (CCPA 1979) . 31Federated Foods, Inc. v. Fort Howard Paper Co.544 F.2d 1098, 192 U.S.P.Q. 24 (CCPA 1976) . 18Gen. Mills, Inc. v. Fage Dairy Proc. Indus. S.A.100 U.S.P.Q.2d 1584 (T.T.A.B. 2011) . 25Hard Rock Café Int’l (USA) Inc. v. Elsea56 U.S.P.Q.2d 1504 (T.T.A.B. 2000) . 29Herbko Int’l., Inc. v. Kappa Books, Inc.64 U.S.P.Q.2d 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2002). 17In re Chatam Int’l., Inc.380 F.3d 1340, 71 U.S.P.Q.2d 1944 (Fed. Cir. 2004) . 19, 20In re Denisi225 U.S.P.Q. 624 (T.T.A.B. 1985) . 193
In re Dixie Restaurants Inc.105 F.3d 1405, 41 U.S.P.Q.2d 1531 (Fed. Cir. 1997) . 18In re Jack B. Binion93 U.S.P.Q.2d 1531 (TTAB 2009) . 20In re Lamson Oil Co.6 U.S.P.Q.2d 1041 (TTAB 1987) . 20In re Majestic Distilling Co., Inc.315 F.3d 1311, 65 U.S.P.Q.2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2003) . 18In re National Data Corp.753 F.2d 1056, 224 U.S.P.Q. 749 (Fed. Cir. 1985) . 20In re R.C. Bigelow Inc.199 U.S.P.Q. 38 (T.T.A.B. 1978) . 29In re the W.W. Henry Co., LP82 U.S.P.Q.2d 1213 (T.T.A.B. 2007) . 24In re Viterra Inc.671 F.3d 1358, 101 U.S.P.Q.2d 1905 (Fed. Cir. 2012) . 24King Candy Company v. Eunice King’s Kitchen, Inc.496 F.2d 1400, 182 U.S.P.Q. 108 (CCPA 1974) . 17L.C. Licensing, Inc. v. Berman86 U.S.P.Q.2d 1883 (TTAB 2008) . 16L’Oreal S.A. v. Marcon102 U.S.P.Q.2d 1434 (TTAB 2012) . 17Lipton Industries Inc. v. Ralston Purina Co.670 F.2d 1024, 213 U.S.P.Q. 185 (CCPA 1982) . 16M2 Software, Inc. v. Madacy Entm’t421 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir. 2005) . 31Octocom Systems, Inc. v. Houston Computer Services, Inc.918 F.2d 937, 16 U.S.P.Q.2d 1783 (Fed. Cir. 1990) . 13, 22, 24Odom’s Tennessee Pride Sausage, Inc. v. FF Acquisition, L.L.C.600 F.3d 1343, 93 U.S.P.Q.2d 2030, (Fed. Cir. 2010) . 18Otto Roth & Co. v. Universal Foods Corp.209 U.S.P.Q. 40 (CCPA 1981) . 17Palm Bay Imports, Inc. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee En 1772396 F.3d 1369, 73 U.S.P.Q.2d 1689 (Fed. Cir. 2005) . 18, 204
Penguin Books Ltd. v. Eberhard48 U.S.P.Q.2d 1280 (TTAB 1998) (Fed. Cir. 1998) . 13, 24Recot Inc. v. M.C. Becton214 F.3d 1322, 54 U.S.P.Q.2d 1894 (Fed. Cir. 2000) . 26Sealed Air Corp. v. Scott Paper Co.190 U.S.P.Q. 106 (TTAB 1975) . 20Selva & Sons, Inc. v. Nina Footwear, Inc.705 F.2d 1316, 217 U.S.P.Q. 641 (Fed. Cir. 1983) . 16Shen Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Ritz Hotel Ltd.393 F.3d 1238, 73 U.S.P.Q.2d 1350 (Fed. Cir. 2004) . 18Specialty Brands, Inc. v. Coffee Bean Distributors, Inc.748 F.2d 669, 223 U.S.P.Q. 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1984) . 26Stone Lion Capital Partners, L.P. v. Lion Capital LLP746 F.3d 1317, 110 U.S.P.Q.2d 1157 (Fed. Cir. 2014) . passimTruescents LLC v. Ride Skin Care, L.L.C.81 U.S.P.Q.2d 1334 (TTAB 2006) . 20Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc.505 U.S. 763, 23 U.S.P.Q.2d 1081 (1992) . 26Univ. of Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co. Inc.703 F.2d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 1983) . 31W.R. Grace & Co. v. Herbert J. Meyer Indus., Inc.190 U.S.P.Q. 308 (T.T.A.B. 1976) . 29Weiss Associates Inc. v. HRL Associates Inc.902 F.2d 1546, 14 U.S.P.Q.2d 1840 (Fed. Cir. 1990) . 28StatutesPage No.15 U.S.C. § 1052(d) . 3215 U.S.C. § 1065 . 2815 U.S.C. § 1115 . 28RulesPage No.37 C.F.R. § 2.122 . 6TBMP § 309.03(b) . 165
INTRODUCTIONOpposer, WestGUARD Insurance Company (“Opposer” or “Guard”), through its undersignedcounsel, hereby submits its Main Brief on the Merits. The instant Opposition No. 91-234,475 is based onGuard’s ownership and use of, and prior rights in, its registered and common law GUARD Marks1 for awide range of insurance services. The Notice of Opposition alleged priority and likelihood of confusionbetween Opposer’s GUARD Marks and services, on the one hand, and the applied-for mark WorkersCompGUARD (“WorkersComp” disclaimed) of Appln. No. 87/412,642 (“WorkersComp GUARD Mark”),sought for registration by Applicant, Hanover Stone Partners, LLC (“Hanover” or “Applicant”) inconnection with “Providing information in the field of workers' compensation; Providing informationregarding workers' compensation insurance policy rates; Insurance consulting in the field of workers'compensation insurance; Advising clients with respect to the purchase and cost of workers' compensationinsurance; Advising clients with respect to claims administration in the field of workers' compensationinsurance” on the other.DESCRIPTION OF THE RECORDIn accordance with Trademark Rule 2.122, 37 C.F.R. § 2.122, the record includes the pleadings inthis proceeding, the file history for Appln. No. 87/142,642, Opposer’s Testimony by Declaration ofElizabeth Hartman (33 TTABVUE 2-414 and 34 TTABVUE 2-39 (Conf.)) and WestGUARD’s Notice ofReliance (35 TTABVUE 2-216), which includes the status and title of WestGUARD’s Reg. Nos. 1392605,1559254, 1614207, 2890017, 2944719, 3385994, 3634217, 3668548, 4063797, 4752430 and 4799970(Opposer’s “GUARD Registrations”) as Exhibit G, and Defendant’s Notice of Reliance (39 TTABVUE 226), as limited by the T.T.A.B. Order of June 14, 2021 (44 TTABVUE).STATEMENT OF THE ISSUESThe issue in this proceeding is whether, under the analysis in Application of E.I. duPont de Nemours& Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 U.S.P.Q. 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973), the “WorkersComp GUARD” Mark1See Recitation of Facts, infra, for the full definition of “GUARD Marks.”6
(“WorkersComp” disclaimed) is likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception with the GUARD Marksamong the public for identical and related insurance services in the same channels of trade.RECITATION OF FACTSOn May 10, 2017, Opposer WestGUARD, with the belief that it will be damaged by registrationon the Principal Register of the mark WorkersComp GUARD shown in Appln. No. 87/142,642 (Class 36),filed the instant opposition. See 1 TTABVUE 1-46 (“Notice”). Based on its extensive prior use andfederally registered2 and common law trademarks for or including the word GUARD (the “GUARDMarks”) as the dominant element (and emphasized as such throughout WestGUARD’s advertising andpromotional materials, as discussed herein), WestGUARD filed the instant opposition based on priority andlikelihood of confusion. 1 TTABVUE 1-46A.WestGUARD, Its History, Insurance Offerings and TrademarksWestGUARD is one of the most recognizable and respected names in the insurance industry, usingits GUARD (and GUARD-formative) trade names and trademarks for nearly 39 years, dating back to thefounding of its original GUARD companies in 1982. See 33 TTABVUE 3-7 (¶¶9, 16 and 17). GUARDhas consistently used its GUARD trademarks in such a way that the GUARD portion of the marks isemphasized and recognized by consumers and those in the industry, especially given fact that the GUARDcompanies are known as simply “GUARD” in the industry (and have been for so many years). 33TTABVUE 7 (¶¶18 and 19).1.WestGUARD Operates Under the GUARD Marks, and Provides Insurance Offeringsand Related Services in the Field of Workers’ CompSince 1982, Opposer has continuously used its GUARD marks in connection with a broad range ofinsurance services to business customers of various sizes including small to mid-size businesses and midmarket businesses, 33 TTABVUE 159, as well as individual customers. Opposer’s insurance lines featureWorkers Comp (listed first at 33 TTABVUE 32), Businessowners, Commercial Auto, Commercial2See 33 TTABVUE 6-7 (¶17) and 161-245 (including Exh. G); 35 TTABVUE 3-4 (¶6) & 119-203 (including Exh.G - WestGUARD’s GUARD Registrations, relied upon herein).7
Umbrella, Disability, Professional Liability, and Commercial Package, as well as personal insurance linesof homeowners and personal umbrella policies. 33 TTABVUE. 4 (¶10-12) and 20-24 (including Exh. C- a representative sample of current wide range of insurance offerings); 33 TTABVUE 4-5, (¶13) and 34TTABVUE 3-39 (including Exh. D - Conf.); 33 TTABVUE 7 (¶18), 258-304, 323-375, 387-403 (includingExh. K - a representative sample of Guard’s wide range of insurance offerings).Focusing on workers’ compensation insurance (more commonly known, and referred to herein, as“workers’ comp”) in the early years, Guard is now active, and has been for many years, in essentially everyaspect of the insurance industry and, as one would expect from a Warren Buffet company, utilizes allavailable channels of trade. Guard uses its name and marks on the underwriting level, when dealing withinsurance agents and brokers, and when dealing with insureds. Guard is not simply an underwriter orreinsurer, and does not merely operate behind the scenes, but, instead, is also a consumer-facing business.33 TTABVUE 4 (¶12), 21-22 (including Exh. C); 33 TTABVUE 7 (¶18) and 274-302, 305-323, 330,333-335, 349-351, 353, 359 & 368 (including Exh. K). Guard provides insurance services, as well asthrough agents. Guard advertises and promotes its insurance services through common channels, includingin printed and electronic publications which go to agents, brokers and prospective and actual insureds.Guard also advertises and promotes through direct marketing, trade shows and conferences and onlinethrough its own website such that Guard and the GUARD Marks is encountered by and recognized by awide range of individuals in various aspects of the insurance business. 33 TTABVUE 4 (¶10-12) & 2024, (including Exh. C); 33 TTABVUE 7 (¶18) and 258-403 (including Exh. K - a representative sampleof Opposer’s marketing and advertising materials, Opposer’s website and website functionality, includinginsurance and policy information, login and claims services for individuals, as well as agents); 33TTABVUE 8-9 (¶¶27-28) and 406-407 (including Exh. M - a representative sampling of printed andelectronic publications in which Guard featured advertisements in 2018 and 2019); 33 TTABVUE 9 (¶31)and 408-414 (including Exh. N - a representative sample of trade shows and conferences attended by Guard8
in 2019). These materials provide highly valuable information to people at all levels about workers’compensation and insurance therefor.As would be expected in lines of insurance business, consumers “shop” for policies as to benefitsand premiums. When a policy is offered by Guard and/or its agents, materials are provided which outlinethe benefits of Guard’s policies, including workers’ comp policies. Proposals for insurance also provideinformation relating to the premiums and rates charged for such policies. 33 TTABVUE 4 (¶12) and 2122 (including Exh. C); 33 TTABVUE 7 (¶18) and 274-285, 293-321 & 347 (including Exh. K).Claims are part and parcel of the insurance business and Guard offers help and advice on theprocessing of claims. Indeed, Guard even maintains a website for processing and administering claimswhich is accessible inter alia to industry representatives, insureds and claimants. Indeed, Guard assistsinsureds and advises them in the claims process. See, e.g., 33 TTABVUE 268 where Guard explains thatit offers:claims value-added services provided that help policyholders realize the full benefit of theircoverage . . . in the easiest possible way (Berkshire Hathaway GUARD has also beenselected as a Workers’ Compensation Servicing Carrier in seven states.)See, also, 35 TTABVUE 307-314.The GUARD name and mark is so important and pervasive that Guard even procured thewww.guard.com domain name which further reminds people of GUARD with every electronic transactionwith the company. 33 TTABVUE 3 (¶6), 4 (¶12), 7 (¶18), 13-16 (including Exh. A), 21-24 (includingExh. C) and 305-323 & 390-395 (including Exh. K).2.THE GUARD Name and Trademarks Have Been The Focus And The “Identity” ofGuard’s Insurance Business Notwithstanding Acquisitions, and Changes inOwnership.In the mid-1980’s the original GUARD companies became known as The GUARD Network andbegan trading under that name. 33 TTABVUE 3-4 (¶9) and 17-19 (including Exh. B). The variousGUARD and WestGUARD Insurance Group companies, namely WestGUARD Insurance Company (and9
its wholly owned insurance company subsidiaries AmGUARD Insurance Company, AZGUARD InsuranceCompany, EastGUARD Insurance Company and NorGUARD Insurance Company) have consistently (andare still today) known in the relevant industry as just “GUARD,” a shortened version of the trade name“Berkshire Hathaway GUARD Insurance Companies.” 33 TTABVUE 3-4 (¶9) and 17-19 (including Exh.B). Opposer is identified as just “GUARD,” both internally and externally, including in third-party articlesdiscussing the prominence and great success of GUARD in the insurance field. 33 TTABVUE 5 (¶14)and 62-151 (including Exh. E). In fact, identifying Opposer as just “GUARD” is so common and widelyrecognized that Opposer’s previous headquarters was known as “GUARD Center” (with just “GUARDCENTER” on the front of the building) and its current headquarters is known as “GUARD Towers” (with“GUARD” displayed in all caps and in a larger font than the other text on the building sign). 33 TTABVUE5 (¶15) and 152-160 (including Exh. F). Opposer has enhanced its “GUARD” identity by adopting andusing a distinctive GUARD Descriptive or Geographic Element trademark strategy, taking care toemphasize “GUARD” – this naming trend is recognizable and points uniquely and unmistakably toOpposer.33 TTABVUE 5-7 (¶¶16-17, 19-20) and 161-245 (including Exh. G).For example,WestGUARD (i.e. GUARD insurance services targeted at the West Coast, EastGUARD InsuranceCompany (i.e. GUARD insurance services targeted at the East Coast, BizGUARD Plus (i.e. GUARDinsurance services for businesses), etc. This unique naming strategy maintains the dominance of “GUARD”and also maintains Opposer’s consistent messaging to consumers that GUARD is providing the insuranceservices. Opposer also takes care to emphasize this intentional naming strategy by virtually alwaysdisplaying its GUARD Marks with an emphasis on “GUARD,” by depicting this wording in a differentsize, font and/or color to set it apart from any additional geographic or descriptive wording. 33 TTABVUE7 (¶18) and 258-403 (including Exh. K). For example:10
Coupling Opposer’s unique and identifiable trademark strategy with Opposer’s 39 years of excellence inthe insurance industry, with 26 of those years (from 1981 to 2008) focusing on workers’ comp) identifiedas simply “GUARD,” the GUARD Marks are inextricably linked in the minds of industry professionals andconsumers to workers’ comp insurance and to Opposer, Guard. 33 TTABVUE 4-5 (¶¶10-15) and 20-160(including Exhs. C, D, E and F).GUARD established itself early on as an industry frontrunner, enjoying massive popularity overthe past 39 years. 33 TTABVUE 4-5 (¶13) and 25-151 (including Exhs. D and E). GUARD’s popularityand recognition has only benefitted over the past nine years as a Berkshire Hathaway company, run byWarren Buffett, the seventh wealthiest person in the world. 33 TTABVUE 5 (¶14) and 62-69 (includingExh. E). Despite the recognition that comes with being a Berkshire Hathaway company, GUARD’sindustry recognition as just “GUARD” was and is so strong upon acquisition that Opposer, still today, iswidely recognized as simply “GUARD” and, while the connection is known in the industry, Opposer doesnot need to rely on the Berkshire Hathaway dTermmimicking astrategy(i.e.,uniquefont:will undoubtedly lead to consumer confusion, false association and damageOpposer and its reputation. 33 TTABVUE 7-8 (¶¶21-23), 247-248 (including Exh. H) and 39 TTABVUE11-12, 14, 16 & 21 (including examples of Applicant’s marketing material, reflecting its use of itsWorkersComp GUARD mark in the same marketing style used by Opposer).3.WestGUARD’s TrademarksOpposer’s, GUARD Marks include, without limitation, the various trademarks below:GUARD’s Common Law GUARD MarksGUARD has continuously used the GUARD Marks throughout the United States on and inconnection with its insurance and related services (provided and marketed in all normal channels of trade11
and to the usual purchasers, without restriction, as established below in Section D) since as early as 1982(pictorial representations of the GUARD Marks shown below):GUARDGUARD E-Z RateGUARDCoWestGUARDAmGUARD Insurance CompanyNorGUARD Insurance CompanyEastGUARD Insurance CompanyBizGUARD Plus33 TTABVUE 5 (¶16).GUARD RegistrationsOpposer, Guard, is also the owner of the following valid and subsisting Federal registrations3:Reg. No. 1614207 for GUARD Insurance Group, issued September 18, 1990 for “Insurance services - namely, theunderwriting of workers' compensation, property and casualty insurance,” in Int’l Class 36. A Declaration of Use andIncontestability under Sections 8 & 15 has been accepted and acknowledged for this registration.Reg. No. 3385994 for GUARDCo, issued February 19, 2008 for “Managed care services, namely, electronic processing ofhealth care information; Managed care services, namely, utilization review and pre-certification services, in Class 35; andManaged health care services,” in Int’l Class 44. A Declaration of Use and Incontestability under Sections 8 & 15 has beenaccepted and acknowledged for this registration.Reg. No. 2890017 for GUARD E-Z Rate, issued September 28, 2004 for “Providing price quotations to insurance agents viathe internet, in Int’l Class 36; and providing temporary use of non-downloadable computer software for insurance agents todetermine pricing of insurance policy,” in Int’l Class 42. A Declaration of Use and Incontestability under Sections 8 & 15 hasbeen accepted and acknowledged for this registration.Reg. No. 2944719 for WestGUARD, issued April 26, 2005 for “Insurance services, namely, the underwriting of workers'compensation insurance,” in Int’l Class 36. A Declaration of Use and Incontestability under Sections 8 & 15 has beenaccepted and acknowledged for this registration.Reg. No. 4799970 for WestGUARD, issued August 25, 2015 for “Insurance services, namely, the underwriting of workers'compensation, property and casualty insurance, including commercial auto, business owners' policies and umbrella coverage,”in Int’l Class 36.Reg. No. 3668548 for EastGUARD Insurance Company, issued August 18, 2009 for “Insurance services, namely, theunderwriting of workers' compensation, property and casualty insurance, including commercial auto, business owners' policiesand umbrella coverage,” in Int’l Class 36. A Declaration of Use and Incontestability under Sections 8 & 15 has been acceptedand acknowledged for this registration.3See fn. 2, supra.12
Reg. No. 1559254 for NorGUARD Insurance Company, issued October 3, 1989 for “Insurance services - namely, theunderwriting of casualty insurance,” in Int’l Class 36. A Declaration of Use and Incontestability under Sections 8 & 15 hasbeen accepted and acknowledged for this registration.Reg. No. 4063797 for BizGUARD Plus, issued November 29, 2011 for “Underwriting services for property, casualty,accident and health insurance, excluding insurance underwriting in the field of professional liability and directors and officersliability,” in Int’l Class 36. A Declaration of Use and Incontestability under Sections 8 & 15 has been accepted andacknowledged for this registration.Reg. No. 4752430 for BizGUARD Plus and Design, issued June 9, 2015 for “Underwriting services for property, casualty,accident and health insurance, excluding insurance underwriting in the field of professional liability and directors and officersliability,” in Int’l Class 36.Reg. No. 1392605 for AmGUARD Insurance Company, issued May 6, 1986 for “Insurance services - namely, theunderwriting of property and casualty insurance,” in Int’l Class 36. A Declaration of Use and Incontestability under Sections 8& 15 has been accepted and acknowledged for this registration.Reg. No. 3634217 for AmGUARD Insurance Company, issued June 9, 2009 for “Insurance services, namely, theunderwriting of workers' compensation, property and casualty insurance, including commercial auto, business owners' policiesand umbrella coverage,” in Int’l Class 36. A Declaration of Use and Incontestability under Sections 8 & 15 has been acceptedand acknowledged for this registration.33 TTABVUE 6-7 (¶17) and 161-245 (including Exh. G). These registrations do not have any limitationsas to channels of trade or classes of purchasers, so it is legally conclusively presumed that the respectiveservices are marketed in all normal trade channels for such services, to the usual purchasers. See StoneLion
Westguard Insurance Company Correspondence Address JEFFREY H KAUFMAN TECHMARK GREENSTEIN LAW PC 1751 PINNACLE DRIVE, SUITE 1000 TYSONS, VA 22102 UNITED STATES Primary Email: jhk@techmark.com 703-649-3230 Submission Brief on Merits for Plaintiff Filer's Name Jeffrey H. Kaufman Filer's email jhk@techmark.com, ndg@techmark.com Signature /Jeffrey H .
