Copy of Elevate FCU's Certificate ofTrademark from the State of Utah.

A Utah-based credit union has asked a U.S. District Court tomake a Colorado credit union back off of alleged threats tosue for trademark infringement, according to acourt complaint filed earlier this month.

In the filing, the Brigham City, Utah-based Elevate FederalCredit Union claimed that the Boulder, Colo.-based ElevationsCredit Union has repeatedly threatened to sue after the Utahcredit union began efforts to change its name in 2018. Elevate,which has $146 million in assets and about 13,000 members,previously operated under the name Box Elder County Federal CreditUnion.

The NCUA blessed its name change, Elevate told the court.

"Plaintiff sought prior permission on January 30, 2018, from theNational Credit Union Association, the entity that approves andregulates all credit unions, to change its name to Elevate FederalCredit Union. Following the NCUA approval process, on February 28,2018, plaintiff received a certificate of resolution from the NCUAgranting plaintiff permission to use the name Elevate FederalCredit Union and reserving the name for plaintiff," it said in thecomplaint. "On December 17, 2019, the NCUA officially changedplaintiff's name to Elevate Federal Credit Union, withoutobjection, despite (the) NCUA's full knowledge of the existence ofElevations Credit Union."

"(The) NCUA does not approve a name for a credit union that itbelieves is too similar in name or membership to another creditunion. Based on (the) NCUA's approval, plaintiff understood thatthere would be no legal issues with its rebranding," it added.

About a week before the NCUA implemented the official namechange, however, Elevations allegedly sent to Elevate a letterobjecting to the new moniker, according to the complaint. But it was too late at that point,Elevate said.

"By then, plaintiff's rebranding was already irreversible. It nolonger was authorized to do business as Box Elder County FederalCredit Union and can only do business as Elevate Credit Union, perthe rules and regulations of (the) NCUA," Elevate said.

Elevations, which has $2.2 billion in assets and about 144,000members, doesn't operate in Utah, and the Utah-based Elevatedoesn't operate in Colorado, according to the complaint.

Elevate also told the court that its trademarks weren'tconfusingly similar to Elevations' trademarks and that it's unawareof any actual confusion among members.

"The marks do not sound alike, do not have the same appearanceand do not have the same meaning," it said. "The term 'elevate' andthe term 'elevations' do not have the same meaning, appearance,sound or commercial impression."

"The [United States Patent and Trademark Office] has repeatedlyconcluded that a mark containing the word 'elevate' as the onlydistinctive element would not create a likelihood of confusion witha mark containing the term 'elevations' or 'elevation' as the onlydistinctive element, even when the marks are used in connectionwith identical or closely related goods or services," the creditunion added.

"There are literally dozens of companies using marks thatcontain the terms 'elevation,' 'elevations,' 'elevate,' 'elevated'and 'elevating' as the dominant or often only nondescriptiveelement of their respective marks," it said.

Elevations did not respond to a request for comment.