The Board affirmed Section 2(d) refusals to register the mark
BOYY for sunglasses and clothing, finding the mark
confusingly similar to the mark BOY, registered
under Section 2(f) for partly identical clothing items. Applicant
tried various arguments to overcome the refusal based on its
existing registration for BOYY, issued in 2007 [and mistakenly
referred to as "incontestable" by the Board] for bags and
purses, but to no avail. To add insult to injury, the Board went on
to find BOYY merely descriptive of applicant's goods. In re Boyy Inc. Serial Nos. 87298620,
87298664, and 87298682 (September 14, 2018) [not precedential]
(Opinion by Judge Christopher Larkin).
The Board had little trouble finding the marks confusingly
similar. Likewise, the mere descriptiveness refusal was
straightforward, since the applied-for mark describes the intended
users of the goods (male children).
