1. Trademark Attorney Brooklyn: the Initial Opposition Filing
The case began when our client, Revolutionary Automotive Designs (RAD), filed an application to register the mark "RAD" for their new line of custom alloy wheels.
Shortly after the application was published for opposition, a competing company, Motorwerks Elite Components (MEC), filed a notice of opposition with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), seeking to prevent the registration.
An experienced trademark attorney in Brooklyn is essential in responding to such challenges effectively.
Grounds for the Challenge
MEC's opposition was based on several key arguments under the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C.).
First, they alleged that RAD's mark was likely to cause confusion with their own established branding under 15 U.S.C. § 1052(d), claiming they had prior use and reputation in a similar market.
Second, MEC argued that RAD had no bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce at the time of filing, a requirement under 15 U.S.C. § 1051(b).
Lastly, they contested RAD's ownership claim, suggesting MEC had superior rights to the mark.
A skilled trademark attorney in Brooklyn can dissect these claims and formulate a robust defense.
2. Trademark Attorney Brooklyn: Navigating Evidentiary Disputes
A significant portion of the dispute centered on the admissibility and relevance of digital evidence presented by both parties.
MEC introduced documents from websites like the Wayback Machine, Facebook, and Instagram to establish their alleged prior reputation, while RAD presented Google Analytics data to demonstrate their marketing preparations.
A trademark attorney in Brooklyn must be proficient in handling evidentiary objections based on the Federal Rules of Evidence.
Admissibility of Digital Evidence
Both sides raised objections to the evidence submitted.
MEC challenged the authenticity and reliability of RAD's analytics data, arguing it was hearsay and its probative value was outweighed by its potential to mislead.
In turn, SJKP argued that the web-based documents MEC relied on lacked proper foundation and were not admissible as business records.
Successfully navigating these technical legal arguments requires a trademark attorney in Brooklyn with deep experience in intellectual property litigation and evidence law.
The Board had to carefully consider whether this digital evidence met the standards for business records under the Federal Rules of Evidence.
3. Trademark Attorney Brooklyn: Key Legal Arguments and Defenses
SJKP’s strategy focused on methodically addressing each of MEC’s claims while building a strong affirmative case for our client, RAD.
This involved presenting clear evidence of both ownership and a legitimate intent to use the mark in commerce, as well as arguing against the likelihood of consumer confusion.
Hiring a proficient trademark attorney in Brooklyn was crucial for presenting these complex arguments persuasively.
Establishing Valid Ownership and Intent
To counter the claim of lacking a bona fide intention to use, our legal team provided substantial evidence of RAD's business activities prior to the application filing date.
This included detailed business plans, product design schematics, and records of communication with manufacturers and distributors.
These documents demonstrated that RAD had taken concrete steps to use the "RAD" mark in the ordinary course of trade, satisfying the requirements of the Lanham Act.
A proactive trademark attorney in Brooklyn understands the importance of compiling such evidence to prove genuine commercial intent.
Refuting Likelihood of Confusion
SJKP successfully argued that consumers were not likely to be confused between the two marks.
We demonstrated that MEC's claimed reputation was not as widespread in the relevant consumer market as they asserted.
Furthermore, we highlighted key differences in the design, sound, and overall commercial impression of the "RAD" mark compared to MEC's branding.
A trademark attorney in Brooklyn can effectively analyze the relevant factors, such as the similarity of the marks, the relatedness of the goods, and the channels of trade, to defeat a claim of confusion.
4. Trademark Attorney Brooklyn: the Successful Outcome and Decision
After careful consideration of the evidence and legal arguments presented by both sides, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ruled in favor of our client, RAD.
The decision allowed RAD to overcome the opposition and move forward with securing their valuable brand identity in the competitive automotive market.
This outcome underscores the value a dedicated trademark attorney in Brooklyn brings to complex intellectual property disputes.
The Board’S Final Decision
The Board found that RAD demonstrated priority of use and a bona fide intent to use the mark.
The Board also concluded that MEC failed to prove a likelihood of confusion, dismissing their opposition under 15 U.S.C. § 1052(d).
The Board dismissed MEC’s opposition, allowing the application to proceed through the registration process.
This case study is a testament to the fact that trademark disputes require meticulous preparation and expert legal navigation.
The attorneys at SJKP are equipped to handle complex trademark opposition and cancellation proceedings, protecting our clients' intellectual property rights from initial application to final resolution.
If your business is facing a trademark challenge or needs to enforce its rights, contact our experienced team for a consultation.
23 Feb, 2026
