Hims takes aim at seven “HER” brands in nine new trademark oppositions

Hims, Inc. has filed nine trademark opposition proceedings in a single day, challenging seven applications built around the formative “HER” and relying on its portfolio of HERS and HIMS & HERS registrations.

The proceedings were filed before the US Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) on September 14, according to USPTO records. The nine oppositions target the marks HER FIRST, HER FIRST WOMEN’S HEALTH, HER ERA, HER SKIN, CHAPTERS OF HER, HER ESSENTIALS, and HELLO HER.

The nine proceedings concern nine applications because two of the marks are each the subject of two oppositions. HER FIRST is challenged in proceedings 91310348 and 91310350, while HER FIRST WOMEN’S HEALTH is challenged in proceedings 91310351 and 91310352.

Hims relies on HERS and HIMS & HERS marks

The new oppositions share a central allegation: Hims claims that the opposed marks are likely to cause confusion with its existing HERS or HIMS & HERS marks.

In the notices, Hims repeatedly argues that “HER” is the dominant element and that the additional wording does not sufficiently distinguish the challenged marks.

The arguments vary according to the individual applications. Hims characterizes “FIRST” in HER FIRST as laudatory and suggestive, while in the HER FIRST WOMEN’S HEALTH proceedings it points to a disclaimer of “WOMEN’S HEALTH” and argues that the additional wording does not avoid a likelihood of confusion.

For HER ERA, Hims argues that “ERA” suggests a period of time without materially changing the impression created by “HER.” In HER SKIN and HER ESSENTIALS, Hims points to disclaimers of “SKIN” and “ESSENTIALS,” respectively.

In the CHAPTERS OF HER proceeding, Hims characterizes “CHAPTERS OF” as a weak narrative lead-in and argues that “HER” is the more memorable element. For HELLO HER, it describes “HELLO” as a greeting without source-identifying significance for the relevant offerings.

Those are Hims’ allegations, not findings by the TTAB. The newly filed proceedings remain pending.

Seven marks across health, skincare and software

The applications cover a range of goods and services.

HER FIRST and HER FIRST WOMEN’S HEALTH, both filed by Majella Cares, concern telehealth, pregnancy-health, physician-referral, educational, and related services.

HER ERA, filed by Lavin National, LLC, covers nutritional supplements as well as telemedicine, medical consultation, and wellness services.

HER SKIN, filed by Her Skin, LLC, concerns cosmetic skincare products, while CHAPTERS OF HER, filed by Kasandra Lynn Garcia, covers non-medicated skincare preparations.

HER ESSENTIALS, filed by Sleepyclub Limited, covers supplements, vitamins, and related goods. HELLO HER, filed by Hello Doctor, Ltd., concerns health-tracking software, a women’s heart-health blog, and software support.

The Hims registrations pleaded also vary between the proceedings according to the goods and services at issue. Across the nine notices, Hims relies on registrations bearing HERS and HIMS & HERS. In the HELLO HER proceeding, it also cites a pending HERS application.

Part of a broader Hims opposition record

The September filings also form part of a larger record of TTAB activity by Hims, Inc.

Trademark-data company GleanMark reviewed 11 earlier closed Hims, Inc. opposition proceedings and found that six ended after Hims withdrew its opposition, three ended after the applicant withdrew or abandoned its application, and two ended in default. None of the 11 closed proceedings had a trial brief recorded in the reviewed dockets.

GleanMark notes that its figures cover a specific cohort of proceedings filed by Hims, Inc., rather than the entire corporate group. It excludes extensions and proceedings involving other Hims-related entities, as well as a separate cancellation petition.

The historical record also does not establish that all withdrawals resulted from settlements. GleanMark found one earlier opposition, Hims, Inc. v. By Him For Her, in which the TTAB expressly recorded withdrawal under a settlement agreement. The closing orders for five other withdrawn oppositions involving Mixhers applications did not state settlement terms.

A test of the scope of “HER” protection?

The nine new proceedings could provide an interesting look at how Hims seeks to enforce its rights around the HERS brand against marks incorporating the related but not identical term “HER.”

The additional wording varies considerably — from FIRST and ERA to SKIN, ESSENTIALS, WOMEN’S HEALTH, CHAPTERS OF, and HELLO. Hims nevertheless advances a recurring argument that those additions do not overcome the similarity it perceives between the marks.

Whether those arguments succeed will depend on the individual applications and the applicable likelihood-of-confusion analysis. The TTAB has not yet made substantive findings in the September proceedings.

For now, the striking feature is the scale and consistency of the filings: nine oppositions filed on the same day, covering seven different “HER” marks, with Hims invoking its HERS and HIMS & HERS portfolio.

The proceedings could therefore provide a useful illustration of how a brand owner seeks to police a common formative across adjacent health, wellness, skincare, supplement, and technology markets — and how the TTAB ultimately treats that formative when it appears alongside additional wording.

The nine proceedings remain pending, and the allegations made in Hims’ notices have not been adjudicated.

← Back to News