Trademark Case| Madras HC Accepts Advertisement Of ‘URELOG’ Mark, Holds Such Word Is Not A Self-Evident Fusion Of Urine Or Urea

Highlighting that as compared to an arbitrary or fanciful mark, ordinarily, the degree of protection extended to a mark consisting of derived elements such as “URE” and “LAC” is lower, the Madras High Court set aside the order passed by the Examiner and directed the Registrar of Trademark to accept the application for advertisement of the Trade Mark ‘URELOG’.

The High Court held so while considering an appeal under Section 91 of the Trademark Act, 1999, seeking to set aside the order passed by the Examiner pertaining to the mark ‘URELOG’ and grant registration of the Trade Mark ‘URELOG’.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy observed that “By taking into account the explanation with regard to the reason for adoption of the mark, the existence of multiple marks containing the element “URE” and the fact that “URELOG” is not a self-evident fusion of urea/urine and ketoanalogue, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the application accepted for advertisement”.

Advocate M.S Bharath appeared for the Appellant, whereas Advocate S. Diwakar appeared for the Respondent.

The brief facts of the case were that the appellant applied for registration of the word mark ‘URELOG’ on a “proposed to be used” basis. The Registrar of Trademarks raised objections under Section 11 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 by citing three similar marks. In response, the appellant stated that the mark “URELOG” is distinctive and was coined honestly by drawing on the element 'URE' which is related to the kidney and the element “LOG” which is derived from “KETOANALOGUE”, which is a kidney-related supplement. After a hearing, the Registrar refused to grant permission.

After considering the submission, the Bench found from the materials placed on record by the appellant, that the element “URE” is derived from the word “urea” or “urine”.

Similarly, the Bench noted that the element “LOG” appears to have been derived from “KETOANALOGUE”, which are broken down forms of amino acids, from which nitrogen is excluded, and it is used as a supplement to improve renal function.

“The appellant has also placed for consideration the number of marks registered with the element “URE” and the element “LAC”. The reason for adoption of the mark was duly explained in the response dated 16.03.2016”, added the Bench.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the application.

Cause Title: TIL Healthcare Private Limited v. Registrar of Trademarks [Neutral Citation: 2023: MHC: 4109]

Click here to read/download the Judgment