TTABlog Test: Which of These Three Section 2(d) Appeals Was/Were Reversed?

TTAB affirmances of Section 2(d) refusals continue to run at about 90% this year. Here are three recent decisions in Section 2(d) appeals. At least one of them resulted in a reversal. What say you? [Answer in first comment].

In re EyePoint Pharmaceuticals US, Inc., Serial No. 98414251 (March 6, 2026) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Christopher C. Larkin). [Section 2(d) refusal of the mark DURAJECT for “Medical and surgical apparatus and instruments for use in ophthalmic procedures" in view of the registered mark DURO-JECT for a “Medical device, namely, a high pressure bone cement injector.”]

In re Catholic Questions Corporation, Serial No. 97646030 (March 5, 2026) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Mark Lebow) [Section 2(d) refusal of CATHOLIC QUESTIONS for "Charitable education services, namely, providing one-on-one explanations and commentary via e-mail, telephone, and postal mail in the field of Catholic apologetics" [CATHOLIC disclaimed] in view of the registered mark shown below, for "Entertainment, namely, a continuing religious education show broadcast over internet, radio, and via podcast" [CHRISTIAN QUESTIONS disclaimed].]

In re Jeremiah C Jones, Serial No. 98668832 (February 27, 2026) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Catherine Dugan O'Connor). [Section 2(d) refusal of the mark DUODISH for “plates, bowls” in view of the registered mark DUO COVER for “dishware covers for use with microwave ovens; non-electric cookware, namely, pans, pots, plates, dishes, bowls, for use in microwave ovens; heat-resistant dish holders; insulated containers for food and beverages" [COVER disclaimed]].

Read comments and post your comment here.

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

Text Copyright John L. Welch 2026.