TTABlog Test: Is BATTLE ROYALE GOLF Merely Descriptive of Golf Games?
The USPTO refused to register the proposed marks BATTLE ROYALE GOLF, in standard character and logo form, for "Equipment sold as a unit for playing golf games; Outdoor activity game equipment sold as a unit comprising of carrying case, sticky golf balls and playing surface mat for playing games" [GOLF disclaimed] on the ground of mere descriptiveness under Section 2(e)(1). Applicant conceded that "'battle royale' is a popular film genre," but argued that the Office "never produced any evidence that golf games are 'multi-player action skill games,'" or that the golf players compete to be the last player or team standing. How do you think this came out? In re Collis ECommerce Ltd. Serial Nos. 97722010 and 97722016 (August 25, 2025) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Martha B. Allard).
Examining Attorney Jeffrey Look provided a dictionary definition of "battle royale" ("a fight participated in by more than two combatants especially: one in which the last fighter in the ring or the last fighter standing is declared the winner.") Applicant's specimen of use referred to a "battle royale mode" that encourages players to "Rack up high scores and avoid hazards to be the last man standing." Applicant feebly argued this was mere "puffery" and "hyperbole and metaphor" and was given too much weight by the Office, but the Board didn't buy it.
The Examining Attorney made of record evidence of third-party uses of the phrase “battle royale” to describe games, many involving combat/shooter-style competitions, in which players or teams are eliminated and the “last-man standing” is deemed the winner
The Examining Attorney also made of record evidence of third-party use in non-shooter and non-combat game settings, including with backyard golf chipping games like that of Applicant, as well as third-party social media posts of images of people playing backyard games (both golf and darts) and an online golf game, all using the term "battle royale."
The third-party use evidence discussed above establishes that the “battle royale” portion of the mark is commonly used to describe “last man standing” gameplay formats. While the battle royale genre may have been popularized with video games involving shooter/combat settings and a shrinking map, the term’s usage has expanded and the record shows that the term is also used with non-violent, non-shooter and non-combat games, including backyard games such as golf mat games similar to that offered by Applicant.
And so, the Board affirmed the refusal.
Read comments and post your comment here.
TTABlogger comment: WYHA? Note that one of the players in the photo has her arm in a sling. I suspect she lost the battle.
Text Copyright John L. Welch 2025.



3 Comments:
(Sigh) I think the USPTO examiners have been looking at too many foreign applications -- and, by this, I mean the RandomWordSmashes spit out by a computer program. Can't companies have a little fun with word choice? Sometimes I despair in advising clients because it is all too easy to slap a "merely descriptive" label on any words that makes sense. What would happen to COPPERTONE at the 21st century USPTO? It "merely describes" one type of desirable shade of tanning. To the ash heap of refusal for you!
I didn't like this at first blush, but it looks like the applicant's usage didn't do them any favors. However, I do not like non-commercial Instagram posts being used as evidence.
Is everything descriptive at the Trademark Office now?
Post a Comment
<< Home