Test Your TTAB Judge-Ability on these Four Mere Descriptiveness Appeals
Here are four recent appeals from mere descriptiveness refusals under Section 2(e)(1). Let's see how you do with them, keeping in mind that the Board affirms, in my estimation, more than 80% of these refusals. [Answers in first comment].
In re Women's Bar Foundation, Serial No. 85240460 (August 29, 2014) [not precedential]. [Requirement for disclaimer of WOMEN'S BAR FOUNDATION in the mark shown below for "charitable foundation services, namely, providing fundraising activities, funding, scholarships and/or financial assistance for women in law school and public service legal positions"].
In re The Travel Chronicle, Serial No. 85368593 (September 2, 2014) [not precedential]. [Mere descriptiveness refusal of THE TRAVEL CHRONICLE for "art prints comprised of digital illustrations originating from photographs"].
In re Breathing Center, LLC, Serial No. 85433600 (September 2, 2014) [not precedential]. [Mere descriptiveness refusal of BREATHING NORMALIZATION for DVDs and videos, books, educational services, and health care services, all in the field of health improvement].
In re Internet Promise Group LLC, Serial No. 85690713 (September 2, 2014) [not precedential]. [Mere descriptiveness refusal of SMART DISPLAY for "computer software application for use in connection with mobile wireless devices equipped with display screens; the application reformats a received web page for display on the screen to make the webpage readable without use of zooming and scrolling functions to be able to view the page content on the display screen"].
Read comments and post your comment here.
TTABlog note: See any WYHAs here?
Text Copyright John L. Welch 2014.
posted by John L. Welch @ 9/09/2014
7 comments
7 Comments:
All four were affirmed.
No surprises here.
SAVORY SKILLETS for frozen vegetables/food affirmed as merely descriptive? Wow, that's just horrifying. A skillet is a FRYING PAN not a vegetable or an entree. That's appalling.
The suspense was killing me :). But, no surprises at the end of the day and consistency in affirming them all. Seems like about 95% affirm rate from your examples.
The Best App To Date is a double entendre, although laudatory. I would have allowed it.
Same with Savory Skillet
What is so disturbing about it is that you can't help but get the idea that the Board has decided it wants a smaller Register. Is this appropriate? A mark with alliteration (savory skillets) is found to merely describe the goods or a feature, use, purpose?? That's total bullshit. If you hear "Savory Skillets" you'd say to yourself, "Hey that describes the food!" Please. The term "skillet" describes a pan you cook the food in. That mark is standpoint suggestive.
I, too, would have allowed THE BEST APP TO DATE as a double entendre.
I agree with the other three being affirmed. Don't consider any of them to be WYHAs, though.
Post a Comment
<< Home