Remove 2021 Remove Copyright Remove Registration Remove Service Mark
article thumbnail

"A S LIVE FOREVER" Fails-to-Function as a Service Mark for Online Retail Store Services, Says TTAB

The TTABlog

The Board observed that "[t]he critical inquiry in determining whether a proposed mark functions as a trademark is how the relevant public perceives the term sought to be registered." 2021 WL 839189, at *13. Simply calling A S LIVE FOREVER a brand cannot transform an otherwise unregistrable designation into a registrable mark."

article thumbnail

TTABlog Quarterly Index: October - December 2021

The TTABlog

35: TTAB Grants MIRAGE BRANDS Cancellation Petition Due To Likelihood of Reverse Confusion On Remand from the CAFC, TTAB Denies Petition for Cancellation of "NAKED" Registration for Condoms TTABlog Test: Three Recent Section 2(d) Inter Partes Cases - How Did They Come Out? [Yes] Precedential No. Lack of Bona Fide Intent: Precedential No.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Precedential No. 34: TTAB Affirms Nonuse Refusal - Service Mark Use Requires Rendering of the Services, Not Just Preparation

The TTABlog

Applicant Suuberg made preparatory measures to use the mark but never rendered the services before her filing date. 88234650 (December 10, 2021) [precedential] (Opinion by Judge Albert Zervas). What is the first use date for the restaurant's services? Text Copyright John L. Welch 2021. See Stawski v.

article thumbnail

TTAB Denies Petition to Cancel "ONEPACKET" Registration: Failure to Prove Nonuse

The TTABlog

Respondent's rope-a-dope defense proved to be successful in this cancellation proceeding aimed at a registration for the mark ONEPACKET (standard form) for computer-related services. 92069714 (July 2, 2021) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Linda A. What if the registrant has no intent one way or the other?

article thumbnail

Three Recent TTAB Oppositions Sustained on the Ground of Non-use

The TTABlog

Here are three recent TTAB rulings, each sustaining an opposition based upon non-use of the opposed service mark. For a service mark, the services must be rendered in order to qualify as "use in commerce" as defined in Section 45 of the Lanham Act. Don't try to register a use-less mark? BlackBerry Limited v.

article thumbnail

Precedential No. 23: F**K Fails to Function As a Source Indicator for Jewelry, Bags, and Retail Services, Says TTAB

The TTABlog

Sections 1 and 2 provide for registration of "trademark[s] by which goods of the applicant may be distinguished from the goods of others." Section 3 states that service marks are registrable "in the same manner and with the same effect as trademarks." are not registrable." Text Copyright John L.

article thumbnail

Precedential No. 26: TTAB Denies "HAPPIEST HOUR" Cancellation Petition for Failure to Prove Priority Via Technical or Analogous TM Use

The TTABlog

Petitioner JNF LLC was undoubtedly unhappy with the result of its petition to cancel a registration for the mark HAPPIEST HOUR for bar and restaurant services. JNF claimed prior use of THE HAPPIEST HOUR for the identical services, but it failed to prove priority. Carson , 2021 USPQ2d 1057, at *21. See Couture v.