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

So far this year, the Board has affirmed about 90% of the Section 2(e)(1) mere descriptiveness refusals reviewed on appeal. Here are three more. How do you think they came out? [Results in first comment].

In re Track Draft, LLC, Serial No. 90704707 (May 28, 2024) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Mark Lebow). [Mere descriptiveness refusal of TRACK DRAFT for, inter alia, online gaming services in the nature of motorsports, automobile racing, and motorcycle racing gambling,]

In re Theia Group, Incorporated, Serial No. 87896620 (May 23, 2024) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Cynthia C. Lynch) [Refusal to register DECISION-GRADE for “Spectral analysis of data via satellites utilizing visible and non-visible electromagnetic wavelengths for use in monitoring and identifying and measuring activity, objects and/or living beings, taking place on, above and/or below the earth’s surface, especially where the quality of the analytics are sufficient to replace human decision making for use in the commercial, agricultural, geologic, energy and industrial fields."]

In re Galaxy Gaming, Inc., Serial No. 97065333 (May 15, 2024) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Martha B. Allard) [Mere descriptiveness refusal of the proposed mark 3 CARD PICK'EM (Stylized), shown below, for "Computer hardware and computer display screen and monitor for game results," and for "Gaming tables for gambling; wagering games, namely, gaming tables with gaming table layouts; gaming tables for playing wagering games with gaming table layouts for use on a gaming table in a casino; card games; casino card games."]

Read comments and post your comment here.

TTABlog comment: How did you do? See any WYHA?s

Text Copyright John L. Welch 2024.