Friday, February 11, 2022

TTABlog Test: How Did These Three Section 2(d) Appeals Turn Out?

So far in 2022, the Board has considered 26 appeals from Section 2(d) refusals and has affirmed the refusal in every case. Here are the latest three appeals. Has the streak been broken? How do you think they turned out? [Answers in first comment].

In re Pretentious Beer LLC, Serial No. 88815635 (February 7, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Linda A. Kuczma). [Section 2(d) refusal of the word-and-design mark shown below, for "beer" [BEER CO. KNOXVILLE TENNESSEE disclaimed], in view of the registered mark PRETENTIOUS for "wine."]

In re Jerry Wagreich, Serial No. 87356161 (February 8, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Thomas Shaw). [Section 2(d) refusal of IPAYED & Design (shown below) for electronic payment services, in view of the registered marks PAYD and PAYD PRO, all for services including electronic funds transfer and the processing of prepaid and credit card transactions.]

In re USAPARK LLC, Serial No. 88808161 (February 8, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Christopher Larkin). (Section 2(d) refusal of USAPARK.NET (in standard character form) for "Airport passenger shuttle services between the airport parking facilities and the airport; Parking lot services; Parking space reservation service; Providing a website featuring information on airport parking; Rental of parking spaces; Rental of car parking spaces," in light of the registered mark USA PARKING for "vehicle parking services" [PARKING disclaimed].

Read comments and post your comment here.

TTABlog comment: How did you do? See any WYHAs?

Text Copyright John L. Welch 2022.


At 6:30 AM, Blogger John L. Welch said...

All three were affirmed.

At 1:26 PM, Blogger Valerie N said...

There were all pretty much no-brainers IMO.

At 3:01 PM, Blogger Gene Bolmarcich, Esq. said...

Who still tries to argue that beer and wine are not related?

At 10:44 AM, Blogger Pamela Chestek said...

There's a problem with IPAYED. So "PAYD" is now going block any homonym of "paid" in relation to financial transactions? How were PAYD and PAYD PRO not refused as descriptive?


Post a Comment

<< Home