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

The Board has affirmed 96 of the first 100 Section 2(d) refusals that came before it on appeal this year. Here are three more for your consideration. How do you think they came out? [Results in first comment].

In re Jeanette Conrad-Ellis, Serial No. 90002764 (June 2, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Mark Lebow) [Section 2(d) refusal of THE BLACK DIAMOND SERIES for "a series of fiction books for teen girls, excluding cartoon science fiction books and comic books" [SERIES disclaimed] in view of the registered mark THE BLACK DIAMOND EFFECT for a "cartoon science fiction books and comic books."]

In re Sunny Days Entertainment LLC, Serial No. 88949521 (June 7, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Elizabeth A. Dunn). [Section 2(d) refusal of POP N PLAY for "play tents" in view of the registered mark POP ‘N PLAY for "play yards."]

In re Boot Royalty Company, L.P., Serial No. 90002396 (June 7, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Cheryl S. Goodman). [Section 2(d) refusal of RESISTOR for "boots," in view of two registered marks (depicted below) owned by different owners: the mark on the left for "Hoodies; T-shirts; Tank-tops” and the mark on the rights for"“Clothing, namely t-shirts, sweaters, sweat-shirts, shirts, pants, jeans, skirts, vests, jackets, belts, hats."]

Read comments and post your comment here.

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

Text Copyright John L. Welch 2022.