M/S. Mocemsa Care v. The Registrar of Trade Marks. C.A. (COMM.IPD-TM) 20/2024, Judgment dt. March 26, 2025

Recently, the Delhi High Court set aside the Trade Marks Registry’s (“Registry”) refusal of Mocemsa Care’s (“Mocemsa”) application for its “OH THAT! NATURAL” Device mark (“Impugned Mark”), ruling that the mark was distinctive despite consisting of common English words.

Mocemsa in the appeal submitted that it had been using the Impugned Mark for products in relation to beauty, skincare, and home fragrances. The trademark application, which claimed use since 2020, was supported by a user affidavit and a single invoice. Registry rejected the application, asserting that the mark lacked distinctiveness, and that one invoice was insufficient to establish that the mark has acquired distinctiveness.

Mocemsa further argued that the Impugned Mark, was unique and innovative even though it was composed of common English words. It was further argued by Mocemsa that the distinctiveness of a combination mark cannot be negated by dissecting the mark.

The Registry argued that one main reason for refusal of the Impugned Mark was because Mocemsa had filed only one invoice.

The court held that even though the Appellant has used common words of the English language, however, the application has been filed for a device mark in which the said words have been used in a composite stylized manner. When viewed as a whole, the mark appears to be a distinctive mark. The court further held that the invoice submitted by Mocemsa was enough considering the fact that there was only one month gap between filing of the application and the use claim.