Refusal of application for a European Union trade mark

(Article 7 and Article 42(2) EUTMR)

Alicante, 05/10/2020

Binky Medical Devices Limited

Stoneythorpe Estate

Southam Warwickshire CV47 2DL

REINO UNIDO

Application No:	018272315
Your reference:	283/BKNY
Trade mark:	SUGAR.WATCH TIMEINRANGE RATING
Mark type:	Word mark
Applicant:	Binky Medical Devices Limited Stoneythorpe Estate Southam Warwickshire CV47 2DL REINO UNIDO

The Office raised an objection on 28/07/2020 pursuant to Article 7(1)(b), (c) and Article 7(2) EUTMR because it found that the trade mark applied for is not eligible for registration, for the reasons set out in the attached letter, which forms an integral part of this decision.

In summary, English-speaking part of the relevant public (composed of professionals (i.e. medical doctors) and the general public) would understand the sign as informing that the goods (for which protection has been sought) will provide a medical doctor or any other person who suffers or is at risk of developing diabetes an indicative “rating” showing how well (or how badly) one’s body is performing in staying in a target range of the desired blood sugar/glucose levels. This can be done with various monitoring and diagnostic instruments and apparatus in Class 10. Goods in Class 5 (Pharmaceutical preparations for human use) will enable to maintain glucose levels in a target range. Goods in Class 14 they may be smartwatches for that purpose or other chronometric instruments that comprise a detector to watch and subsequently to rate the blood sugar level. Therefore, the sign describes the intended purpose of the goods in question.

Since the sign is descriptive of a certain characteristics of the goods for which protection has been sought, it is also incapable of performing the essential function of a trade mark, which is to distinguish the goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings. The addition of a dot ‘.’ between the words ‘SUGAR’ and ‘WATCH’ does not add distinctiveness to the sign. The same could be said about ‘TIME-IN-RANGE’ expression written as a single word The relevant consumer will dissect the mark and without further mental steps understand the meaning of its elements.

Consequently, taken as a whole, the sign for which protection is sought is descriptive and devoid of any distinctive character, and is not capable of distinguishing the goods to which an objection has been raised within the meaning of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(2) EUTMR.

The applicant failed to submit observations within the time limit. For the reasons set out in the letter of objection, and pursuant to Article 7(1)(b), (c) and Article 7(2) EUTMR, the application for European Union trade mark No 18272315 is hereby rejected for all the goods claimed.

According to Article 67 EUTMR, you have a right to appeal against this decision. According to Article 68 EUTMR, notice of appeal must be filed in writing at the Office within two months of the date of notification of this decision. It must be filed in the language of the proceedings in which the decision subject to appeal was taken. Furthermore, a written statement of the grounds of appeal must be filed within four months of the same date. The notice of appeal will be deemed to be filed only when the appeal fee of EUR 720 has been paid.

Laima IVANAUSKIENE