BlackBerry Opposes Qumulex’s Trademark - Tech

BlackBerry confined filed a word of opposition on Tuesday before the Trademark Trial and enchantment Board against  Qumulex Inc.’s application for the QX mark; BlackBerry asserted that it will be harmed with the aid of the registration of the applicant’s mark.

in response to the opposition, the applicant’s QX mark is in classification 9 and forty two, covering “desktop hardware and computer hardware programs for video surveillance” and “Platform as a provider that includes laptop application platform for having access to, configuring, managing, and controlling video surveillance.” 

BlackBerry cited that because at least 1982, “BlackBerry, its predecessor-in-hobby and through subsidiary QNX application systems Inc., has used the trademark QNX (the QNX Mark) to establish its goods and features, inter alia, computing device/gadget/cyber web safety and connectivity solutions; software building structures and embedded utility.” BlackBerry cited that the QNX Mark is in type 9, 16, forty one, and forty two. moreover, BlackBerry mentioned that it is used in reference to “real-time working techniques, middleware, development equipment, and expert capabilities for connected embedded techniques for setting up,” as an instance, “indoor domestic and in-vehicle infotainment, client electronics … video surveillance, network switches & routers, and statistics core products.”

BlackBerry stated that it promotes and sells items and functions using the QNX mark and that the mark has garnered media coverage. in keeping with BlackBerry, the wide use and distribution of the items and services under the QNX mark indicate the goodwill, acceptance and cognizance of the mark and goods in reference to one an extra and BlackBerry. BlackBerry claimed that the QNX mark is famous and its mark predates that applicant’s mark.

additionally, BlackBerry alleged that the applicant’s QX mark “is identical or totally corresponding to the QNX Mark in sight, sound, connotation, and typical business impression.” BlackBerry alleged that the applicant’s goods “are identical, complementary, identical and/or related to the goods and features with which Opposer is using the QNX Mark” and “for which the QNX Mark is registered.” 

because of this, BlackBerry averred that this similarity is likely to trigger buyer confusion, mistake, or deception. BlackBerry contended that buyers are prone to falsely affiliate the applicant’s mark and goods with these of BlackBerry. due to this fact, BlackBerry proffered that here is more likely to dilute the varied best of the QNX mark.

BlackBerry seeks for the opposition to be sustained and for Qumulex’s utility to be refused. BlackBerry is represented via Davis Wright Tremaine LLP.