Master Inspector Certification Board files Petition to Cancel GAHI's deceptively-similar mark

Lawyer up, boys…

Download and read MICB’s Petition to Cancel: Master Inspector Certification Board vs GAHI


You consider, Code Certified Master Inspectors - CCMI’s an affront?

It’s an infringement, yes. You can’t just throw a word in front of our Registered Trademark that has been in use since 1998, anymore than you can open up a fast food chain called Code Kentucky Fried Chicken.

A Trademark protects itself and the space around it.

They intentionally did that to be deceptively similar.


Sic’em Nick! Boy, you gotta watch your backside like a hawk these days. Don’t let them chip away at NACHI intellectual property.

1 Like

I concur.
Not legally proficient when it comes to trade marks, but I do understand your point.
Thank you for clarifying your position.

This is how it appears in GA

Lawyer up. They are going to need about a million and half dollars in legal fees just to lose.


What a great show of “leadership” for you to not try to work it out before taking this action.

1 Like

Boils down to Certification Marks vs. Trademarks. Good article on the difference between the two.

Theirs is just a service mark. Ours is a certification mark that has been in continuous use since 1998.

So I guess using a trademark that requires a certification mark is not valid?

Not if it infringes on our certification mark.

Got it filed today:

1 Like

So basically, you’re going to have to argue the word “certification” and not “code” and I still don’t see that in Trademark infringement. Just don’t see it as a “slam dunk”.

I read it. Personally I would not beat my chest at this stage.

It’s most definitely infringement. You can’t just stick a word in front of our mark and think that you aren’t infringing. The test is: Will it likely cause confusion in the market place when used in the same industry? I’d say that these two marks are confusingly similar:

Certified Master Inspector®
Code Certified Master Inspector

But if they disagree, they can hire law firms to fight us.

I’m sure they will. And 1.5 mil in legal fees is a BIG dream and makes the legal profession a laughing stock in cases like this. Go for it Nick!! I actually hope your side loses this one.

I’m patient.

They started it. They took our mark which has been in continuous use since 1998 and recently filed a deceptively similar mark (our exact mark with the word “code” in front of it). That has zero chance of sticking. We’ll have no problem cancelling it.

They filed a trademark. Not a certification mark. Their trademark is based on being compliant with the ICC certification mark. Again, it’s Certification Mark vs. Trademark. It will be interesting.