Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Test Your TTAB Judge-Ability on these Five Mere Descriptiveness Refusals

The TTAB recently ruled on the appeals from the five Section 2(e)(1) mere descriptiveness refusals summarized below. [Actually, the second refusal was based on Applicant's failure to disclaim "TEAM"]. Let's see how you do with them, keeping in mind that the Board affirms four out of five mere descriptiveness refusals. Do you see any WYHA's here?

In re RealCore Realty LLC, Serial No. 85028127 (August 13, 2012) [not precedential]. [HOUSING ANGELS for "Real estate acquisition services; Real estate investment services; Real estate investment services in the nature of purchasing and selling of real estate for others; Real estate procurement for others; Real estate services to stop foreclosure, namely, mortgage debt management" (Class 36) [HOUSING disclaimed]].

In re Lance Armstrong Foundation, Serial No. 85018297 (August 15, 2012) [not precedential]. [Disclaimer requirement of TEAM in TEAM LIVESTRONG for "Organization of sports events in the field of running, walking, cycling, and swimming; organizing community sporting events; conducting charity sporting events and tournaments" (Class 41)].

In re Seagate Technology LLC, Serial No. 85007424 (August 24, 2012) [not precedential]. [ADAPTIVE MEMORY for "computer hardware and software for processing storage of data utilizing non-volatile solid state storage, namely, hard disk drives combined with solid state memory" (Class 9)].

In re Cantor G&W, L.P., Serial No. 77819424 (August 29, 2012) [not precedential]. [IN-RUNNING for gaming and gambling machines, mobile and wireless gaming and gambling machines; computer hardware; computer software for mobile and electronic wagering through wireless devices; computer gaming and gambling hardware and software; wireless telecommunications devices; computer hardware and software for wireless telecommunications devices; apparatus for wireless transmission and reception of data (Class 9); and Wagering services; casino services; gaming, gambling and betting services; online gaming, gambling and betting services; casino services offered via wireless telecommunications devices; wagering based on the outcome of sporting events; sports betting; providing information in the fields of sports, betting, wagering, and sports betting; providing information in the fields of gambling and gaming; providing information in the field of sporting events; providing online casino games via telecommunication or computer networks" (Class 41)].

Werner Media Partners, LLC, Serial No. 85083690 (August 30, 2012) [not precedential]. [Ortho-Pedic (in the form shown below, and in the color aquamarine) "sleep products, namely, beds, mattresses, wood bedsteads, mattress toppers, pillows; mattress support systems in the nature of mattress foundations, bed frames, and bed headboards; viscoelastic foam mattresses, viscoelastic foam mattress toppers, non-therapeutic pet beds, and non-therapeutic viscoelastic foam pet beds" (Class 20)].

TTABlog hint: They all came out the same way.

Text Copyright John L. Welch 2012.


At 8:58 AM, Blogger Jude said...

Those were in line with what I would have guessed except for the real estate company. Equating ANGELS with financial backers for the purposes of a mere descriptiveness analysis seems a bit restrictive. I would not have made that association at first blush, but I suppose it would depend somewhat on the context of use of the mark.

At 1:07 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The "Angels" decision is a joke. Sure, "angels" has that meaning and there is some connection. But it lacks the immediacy required for descriptiveness, and the other denotations and connotations of "angels" are significantly more prominent in consumers' minds

Consumers would engage in the "mental pause" characteristic of a suggestive mark to make the connection that the USPTO argued regarding the meaning of "angels" in relation to the services.


Post a Comment

<< Home