Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky
In a recent decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit partially upheld and partially overturned a ruling from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) in a dispute between Apex Bank and CC Serve Corp. over the use of “Aspire” marks for financial services. CC Serve, which offers credit card services under the “ASPIRE” mark since 1998, challenged Apex Bank’s attempt to register “ASPIRE BANK” for general banking and financing. The core issue was whether consumers might confuse the two brands, leading to a mistaken belief that they come from the same company.
The TTAB had sided with CC Serve, finding a strong likelihood of confusion based on factors like the similarity of services and marks. It noted that credit card services and broader banking overlap significantly—such as issuing credit or managing accounts—making them “legally identical in part.” However, the Federal Circuit agreed with this assessment but criticized the TTAB for inconsistency in evaluating third-party uses of similar “Aspire” marks. While the TTAB broadly viewed the services as related for one part of its analysis, it narrowed its look at competing marks to only credit card services, ignoring dozens of others in banking and finance. The court stressed that the same standard of similarity should apply across the board.
This flaw meant the TTAB might have overstated the strength of CC Serve’s mark, potentially affecting how similar the overall brands appear to consumers in terms of appearance, sound, and commercial impression. The Federal Circuit affirmed the service similarity finding but sent the case back for a fresh review of those key elements, emphasizing that crowded markets with similar marks can weaken a brand’s protection and reduce confusion risks.