The TTABlog
MAY 29, 2024
97359799 (May 22, 2024) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Wendy B. The Board observed that "[t]he critical inquiry in determining whether a proposed mark functions as a trademark is how the relevant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." Text Copyright John L. Welch 2024.
The TTABlog
FEBRUARY 1, 2024
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in order to qualify as "use in commerce" as defined in Section 45 of the Lanham Act. 91277497 (January 18, 2024) [not precedential] (By the Board).
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
The TTABlog
MARCH 12, 2024
92071814 (March 8, 2024) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Melanye K. Abundance had a license from Mrs. Patricia Dampier to use the mark MRS. COLORADO for its beauty pageant, but that license was terminated in 2015. Mere publicity about services to be rendered in the future does not lay a foundation for an application.
The TTABlog
JULY 8, 2024
The Board found that Registrant Locus Link USA never used the mark in connection with "evaporative air coolers," and rejected Locus Link's interpretation of the identification of goods. 2022-100137E and 2022-100138E (July 1, 2024) [precedential] (Opinion by Judge Jennifer L. Text Copyright John L. Welch 2024.
The TTABlog
MARCH 27, 2024
The Board affirmed a refusal to register the proposed mark WE’RE HERE TO HELP WITH YOUR LEGAL NEEDS! finding that the phrase fails to function as a service mark for "legal services." 90432695 (March 25, 2024) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Cynthia C. Text Copyright John L. Welch 2024.
The TTABlog
FEBRUARY 16, 2024
The Board affirmed a refusal to register the proposed mark EXPERIMENTAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES for “Dietary and nutritional supplements” on the ground that the mark is used solely as a trade name to identify applicant's business and therefore is not registrable. 88291540 (February 14, 2024) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Martha B.
The TTABlog
MARCH 22, 2024
92068213 (March 20, 2024) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Peter W. The Board pointed out that "[t]he addition of a generic or highly descriptive term does not necessarily detract from the separate commercial impression created by the mark APPLE alone." Text Copyright John L. Welch 2024. Charles Bertini v.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
113 
Let's personalize your content