TTABlog Test: Which of These Mere Descriptiveness Refusals Was/Were Reversed?

The TTAB recently ruled on the appeals from 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% these refusals. Answer(s) will be found in the first comment.

In re Friendship Retirement Corporation, Serial No. 87942568 (October 29, 2020) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge David K. Heasley). [Mere descriptiveness refusal of CENTER FOR MODERN AGING for "providing assisted living facilities" and for "continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs) in the nature of nursing home services." Applicant maintained that the Examining Attorney erroneously dissected the proposed mark into its constituent words, each of which has a wide variety of definitions. Applicant claimed that "[w]hen the mark is read as a whole, it is suggestive and invites the consumer to seek out the products and services for further evaluation."]

In re KGEM Golf, Inc., Inc., Application Serial No. 88148572 (November 2, 2020) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Mark Lebow). [Mere descriptiveness refusal of GOLFSUITES for "workshops and seminars in the field of golf; Entertainment in the nature of golf tournaments; Golf driving range services; Entertainment services, namely, amusement arcade services; Entertainment and amusement centers, namely, interactive play areas." Applicant maintained that GOLFSUITES is both incongruous and "is a creative double entendre: "[t]he suffix 'SUITES' carries a double meaning as it potentially relates to both “a group of rooms” as well as the 'sweet spot' of hitting a golf ball."]

In re TriarQ Health, LLC, Serial No. 88149951 (November 3, 2020) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Peter W. Cataldo). [Mere descriptiveness refusal of ONE TEAM CARE for "providing temporary use of online non-downloadable cloud computing software for coordinating the provision of healthcare among caregivers and patients." Applicant argued that the mark is ambiguous and only suggests a function, feature or characteristic of its services.]

Read comments and post your comment here.

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

Text Copyright John L. Welch 2020.