Friday, July 05, 2019

TTABlog Test: How Did These Three 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 the Board affirms, in my estimation, nearly 90% of these refusals. [Answer in the first comment].

In re International Barrel Distributors, Serial No. 87271602 (June 28, 2019) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Peter W. Cataldo). [Refusal to register the mark DEEP TOAST for "wood barrels" on the grounds that the phrase is not inherently distinctive (and lacks acquired distinctiveness)].

In re Essenlix Corporation, Serial No. 87467392  (June 28, 2019) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Jyll Taylor) [Mere descriptiveness refusal of ISELF-TEST for assays, reagents, and apparatus for medical diagnostic testing].

In re The Contentment Foundation Serial Nos. 87958925 and 87958967 (July 2, 2019) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Robert H. Coggins).[Mere descriptiveness refusal of CONTENTMENT FOUNDATION, and requirement of disclaimer of that term in the mark shown below, for "Educational services, namely, conducting seminars, lectures, teleseminars, teleclasses and workshops in the field of contentment, education, positive psychology and human wellbeing . . .].

Read comments and post your comment here.

TTABlog comment: See any WYHA?s here?

Text Copyright John L. Welch 2019.


At 7:32 AM, Blogger John L. Welch said...

All three refusals were affirmed.

At 8:32 AM, Anonymous Carl Oppedahl said...

Thank you.


Post a Comment

<< Home