Friday, July 10, 2015

TTAB Test: Which One of These Four Section 2(d) Refusals Was Reversed?

With the recent flash flood of precedential decisions from the TTAB, we haven't had a TTAB Test in a while. Well, here are four recent appeals from Section 2(d) refusals. Three were affirmed. Which one was reversed? And why? [Answer in first comment].

In re IBrand Accessories LLC
, Serial No. 86185362 (June 29, 2015) [not precedential] [Refusal to register BULLETPROOF SCREEN PROTECTOR for "display screen protectors for providing shade and privacy specially adapted to electronic devices, namely, laptops, cell phones, and personal digital assistants" [SCREEN PROTECTOR disclaimed], in view of the registered mark BULLET-PROOF SHIELDS for "protective sheet for covering laptop computers, MP3 players, ipods, personal digital assistance [sic], mobile phones and other electronics"].

In re Leon Hughes, Sr., Serial No. 86079547 (July 6, 2015) [not precedential]. [Refusal of the mark LEON HUGHES’ COASTERS for "Live performances by a musical group," in view of the registered mark THE COASTERS for "entertainment services in the nature of a musical group"].

In re Korn Ferry Leadership Consulting Corporation, Serial No. 85932617 (July 6, 2015) [not precedential]. [Refusal to register the mark CHOICES for "Providing temporary use of on-line non-downloadable software in the field of human resources that enables users to conduct online evaluation of leadership and managerial aptitudes, competencies, job performance and job development, learning agility, and skills for the purpose of implementing leadership development for individuals and organizations," in view of the identical mark CHOICES registered for "computer programs recorded on magnetic media and instruction manuals sold therewith"].

In re K & N Distributors, Serial No. 86150955 (July 7, 2015) [not precedential]. [Refusal of DERMOPLUS GEL for cosmetics [GEL disclaimed], in view of the registered mark DERMA PLUS for "skin care products, namely, medicated skin care lotions sold in aerosol container" [DERMA disclaimed].

Read comments and post your comment here

TTABlog comment: See any WYHAs here?

Text Copyright John L. Welch 2015.


At 5:53 AM, Blogger John L. Welch said...

The fourth one was reversed.

At 12:53 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You could also have asked in this blog "Which One of These Four Section 2(d) Refusals Was NOT filed by Matthew Swyers?"

At 12:59 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"the record does not support a finding of a likelihood of confusion between Applicant’s marks for “cosmetics” and registrant’s mark for “skin care products, namely, medicated skin care lotions sold in aerosol containers.”


Because "medicated" skin care falls in Class 5 and cosmetics in 3?


Post a Comment

<< Home