TTABlog Test: How Did These Three Section 2(d) Appeals Turn Out?
A TTAB judge once said to me that one can predict the outcome of a Section 2(d) appeal about 95% of the time just by looking at the marks and the goods and/or services. [The fly in the ointment is sometimes the weakness of the cited mark]. Here are three recent Board decisions. How do you think they came out? [Answer in first comment].
In re A & V Leather Inc., Serial No. 98361893 (September 11, 2025) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge George C. Pologeorgis). [Section 2(d) refusal of the mark shown below, for "Cases for eyewear; Cell phone cases; Eye glass cases; Eyewear accessories, namely, straps, neck cords and head straps which restrain eyewear from movement on a wearer; Eyewear cases; Eyewear pouches," in view of the registered mark AV for "Eyeglasses, sunglasses; Eyeglass, sunglass; Eyeglass and sunglass frames; Eyeglass and sunglass chains, cords and straps."]
In re CGTN C.V., Serial No. 88794967 (September 12, 2025) (Opinion by Judge Martha B. Allard) [Section 2(d) refusal to register the mark shown below, for "Hair care products, namely, shampoos, conditioners, hair masks, and scalp treatments in the nature of a non-medicated serum for distribution through independent sales representatives" in view of the registered mark PROLUX for "Cosmetics; cosmetic preparations; make-up; Nail polish; Cleaner for cosmetic brushes; Lip stains; Private label cosmetics; Skin moisturizers used as cosmetics."]
In re Driven P.S.C., Serial No. 98113736 (September 15, 2025) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Lawrence T. Stanley, Jr.). [Section 2(d) refusal of the mark DRIVEN, in standard characters and in the forms shown below, for " accounting services; advice and information concerning commercial business management; business auditing; business risk management services; preparing financial reports for others; tax advisory services; tax consultation," in view of the registered mark DRIVEN for "business support services, namely, business consulting to freelancers, start-ups, existing businesses and non-profit organizations."]
Read comments and post your comment here.
TTABlogger comment: How did you do? See any WYHA?s ?
Text Copyright John L. Welch 2025.







3 Comments:
All refusals were affirmed
The A&V and DRIVEN cases were definitely WYHAs.
Wondering if a clearance search was done on any of these?
Post a Comment
<< Home