Friday, October 02, 2020

TTABlog Test: How Did These Three Section 2(e)(1) Mere Descriptiveness Appeals Come Out?

The TTAB recently ruled on the appeals from the three Section 2(e)(1) mere descriptiveness refusals summarized below. Let's see how you do with them, keeping in mind that last year the Board  affirmed, by my calculation, about 93% of these refusals. Answer(s) will be found in the first comment.


In re Surfline/Wavetrak, Inc., Application Serial No. 88416048 (September 30, 2020) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Albert Zervas). [Mere descriptiveness refusal of FISHTRACK for "online informational services, namely, providing a website featuring non-downloadable fishing charts, fishing reports, and fishing cams in the nature of videos featuring recreational fishing spots non-downloadable informational articles related to fishing, and non-downloadable photos and videos of fish over the Internet.” Applicant argued that its website "provides fishing charts and fishing reports of past fishing activity, but there is no information provided that would allow someone to know where fish are presently found."].

 

In re BFY, LLC, Application Serial No. 88090409 (September 29, 2020) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge David K. Heasley). [Mere descriptiveness refusal of ALLERGEEZ for "homeopathic pharmaceuticals for use in the treatment of allergy symptoms; medicated candies for the treatment of allergy symptoms." Applicant did not disupute that the mark is the phonetic equivalent of "allergies," but it argued that the mark "has an alternative meaning that would be readily perceived by consumers as a double entendre on the phrase ‘ALLERGY EASE.'"].



In re Harry J. Binder and Charles E. Binder, Serial No. 88138741 (September 22, 2020) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Elizabeth A. Dunn). [Mere descriptiveness refusal of THE REP FOR VETS (standard characters) for "advocacy services, namely, legal, paralegal and non-attorney representative services for claimants of veterans benefits." Applicant contended that the words REP and VETS do not necessarily connote “representative” and “veteran” because each term has alternate definitions, such as “repetitions” and “veterinarian."].


Read comments and post your comment here.

TTABlog comment: See any WYHAs here?

Text Copyright John L. Welch 2020.

2 Comments:

At 6:51 AM, Blogger John L. Welch said...

All three were affirmed.

 
At 3:08 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

At first I thought, I want clients who do not mind wasting money on such appeals.
Then I thought better and realized I do not want to waste my time or their money.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home