Merely Descriptive Refusals

(these are actual USPTO trademark refusals where some information has been removed)


SECTION 2(e)(1) REFUSAL – MERELY DESCRIPTIVE

[Redacted] OFFICE ACTION from UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

[This trademark was abandoned by the owner after the first refusal with no attempt to answer the office action.]

 

Registration is refused because the applied-for mark merely describes a feature of applicant’s services.  Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); see TMEP §§1209.01(b), 1209.03 et seq.

 

A mark is merely descriptive if it describes an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose or use of the specified goods and/or services.  TMEP §1209.01(b); see In re Steelbuilding.com, 415 F.3d 1293, 1297, 75 USPQ2d 1420, 1421 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Gyulay, 820 F.2d 1216, 1217-18, 3 USPQ2d 1009, 1010 (Fed. Cir. 1987).

 

The determination of whether a mark is merely descriptive is considered in relation to the identified goods and/or services, not in the abstract.  In re Abcor Dev. Corp., 588 F.2d 811, 814, 200 USPQ 215, 218 (C.C.P.A. 1978); TMEP §1209.01(b); see, e.g., In re Polo Int’l Inc., 51 USPQ2d 1061 (TTAB 1999) (finding DOC in DOC-CONTROL would be understood to refer to the “documents” managed by applicant’s software, not “doctor” as shown in dictionary definition); In re Digital Research Inc., 4 USPQ2d 1242 (TTAB 1987) (finding CONCURRENT PC-DOS merely descriptive of “computer programs recorded on disk” where relevant trade used the denomination “concurrent” as a descriptor of a particular type of operating system).  “Whether consumers could guess what the product is from consideration of the mark alone is not the test.”  In re Am. Greetings Corp., 226 USPQ 365, 366 (TTAB 1985).

 

Applicant seeks to register XXXXX MEDICINE in connection with “promoting the exchange of information and resources within the scientific research and medical communities to achieve advances in the field of healthcare.”

 

It appears that applicant considers the seminar series described in the “Sponsor Guide” to be a means by which information pertinent to “XXXXX medicine” is disseminated.

 

However, proposed mark that describes the subject matter of a seminar has been held to be merely descriptive for such educational services.  See In re The Am. Acad. of Facial Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, 64 USPQ2d 1748 (TTAB 2002) (holding FACIAL PLASTIC SURGERY generic for training, association and collective membership services); In re Inst. Investor, Inc., 229 USPQ 614 (TTAB 1986) (holding INTERNATIONAL BANKING INSTITUTE for organizing seminars for bank leaders of major countries incapable); In re Indus. Relations Counselors, Inc., 224 USPQ 309 (TTAB 1984) (holding INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COUNSELORS, INC. an apt name or so highly descriptive of educational services in the industrial relations field that it is incapable of exclusive appropriation and registration); In re Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 222 USPQ 820 (TTAB 1984) (holding LAW & BUSINESS incapable of distinguishing the services of arranging and conducting seminars in the field of business law); In re Nat’l Shooting Sports Found., Inc., 219 USPQ 1018 (TTAB 1983) (holding SHOOTING, HUNTING, OUTDOOR TRADE SHOW & CONFERENCE incapable for trade show); see also TMEP §1209.01(b).

 

There appear to be three registrations in which “XXXXX MEDICINE” is present.  These are set forth in Attachments 8 through 15.  Third-party registrations featuring the same or similar goods and/or services as applicant’s goods and/or services are probative evidence on the issue of descriptiveness where the relevant word or term is disclaimed, registered under Trademark Act Section 2(f) based on a showing of acquired distinctiveness, or registered on the Supplemental Register.  See Sweats Fashions, Inc. v. Pannill Knitting Co., 833 F.2d 1560, 1564-65, 4 USPQ2d 1793, 1797 (Fed. Cir. 1987); In re Box Solutions Corp., 79 USPQ2d 1953, 1955 (TTAB 2006); In re Finisar Corp., 78 USPQ2d 1618, 1621 (TTAB 2006).

_____________________________________________


Merely Descriptive of Services:

 [SECTION 2(e)(1) REFUSAL- the term is the common descriptor of the purpose or function of the services]

Registration is refused because the applied-for mark merely describes the purpose/function of applicant’s goods and/or services.  Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); see TMEP §§1209.01(b), 1209.03 et seq.

 

A mark is merely descriptive if it describes an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose or use of the specified goods and/or services.  TMEP §1209.01(b); see In re Steelbuilding.com, 415 F.3d 1293, 1297, 75 USPQ2d 1420, 1421 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Gyulay, 820 F.2d 1216, 1217-18, 3 USPQ2d 1009, 1010 (Fed. Cir. 1987).  Moreover, a mark that identifies a group of users to whom an applicant directs its goods and/or services is also merely descriptive.  TMEP §1209.03(i); see In re Planalytics, Inc., 70 USPQ2d 1453, 1454 (TTAB 2004).

 

The applicant seeks to register the term THE XXXXX DONOR PROGRAM for services identified as XXXXX XXXXX donation services. The term immediately and clearly informs viewer of the specific nature of the services—offering a program which establishes XXXXX XXXXX donors for use by others. The specific term “XXXXX donor program” is not unique or coined by the applicant, but is consistently and commonly used by third parties offering the same or similar services to others—operating an XXXXX donor program ( see enclosed materials on such programs offered by third parties). As such, the term appears to be a common or generic method of describing these services, not appropriable by any one party.

 

The applicant has also disclaimed all wording apart from the mark as a whole. However, an entire mark may not be disclaimed.  TMEP §1213.06; see 15 U.S.C. §1056(a); In re Dena Corp. v. Belvedere Int’l Inc., 950 F.2d 1555, 1560, 21 USPQ2d 1047, 1051 (Fed. Cir. 1991); In re JT Tobacconists, 59 USPQ2d 1080, 1081 n.1 (TTAB 2001); In re Anchor Hocking Corp., 223 USPQ 85 (TTAB 1984).  If the applied-for mark is not registrable as a whole, a disclaimer will not make it registrable.  TMEP §1213.06.

 

Disclaimer of each of the words does not produce a term which, as a whole, does not merely describe the purpose of the program or services—providing XXXXX XXXXX donation services. Please withdraw the current disclaimer statement,since such a statement does not allow for registration.

 

For these reasons, registration is refused under the provisions of Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act, on grounds that the term is the common descriptor of the purpose or function of the services.

 

In addition to being merely descriptive, the applied-for mark appears to be generic in connection with the identified services and, therefore, incapable of functioning as a source-identifier for applicant’s services. In re The Am. Acad. of Facial Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, 64 USPQ2d 1748 (TTAB 2002); In re A La Vieille Russie, Inc., 60 USPQ2d 1895 (TTAB 2001); see TMEP §§1209.01(c) et seq., 1209.02.  Under these circumstances, neither an amendment to proceed under Trademark Act Section 2(f) nor an amendment to the Supplemental Register can be recommended.  See TMEP §1209.01(c).

_____________________________________________

Doctrine of Foreign Equivalents

The Doctrine of Foreign Equivalents from Exam Guide 1-08 has been incorporated into the Trademark Manual Of Examining Procedure at TMEP §§1207.01(b)(vi) and 1210.10.

___________________________________________


Call us at 1-651-500-7590 for a Strong Trademark. A Strong Trademark is Not Just a tool to increase sales to customers–it is also easier to sell to your investors & licensees.

Call 1-651-500-7590 or email WP@NJP.legal for Responses to Office Actions; File or Defend an Opposition or Cancellation; Trademark Searches and Applications; Send or Respond to Cease and Desist Letters.

For more information from Not Just Patents, see our other sites:      

Steps to a Patent    How to Patent An Invention

Should I Get A Trademark or Patent?

Trademark e Search    Strong Trademark     Enforcing Trade Names

Common Law Trademarks  Trademark Goodwill   Abandoned Trademarks

Patentability Evaluation

Chart of Patent vs. Trade Secret

Patent or Trademark Assignments

Trademark Disclaimers   Trademark Dilution     TSDR Status Descriptors

Oppose or Cancel? Examples of Disclaimers  Business Name Cease and Desist

Sample Patent, Trademark & Copyright Inventory Forms

Verify a Trademark  Be First To File    How to Trademark Search

Are You a Content Provider-How to Pick an ID  Specimens: webpages

How to Keep A Trade Secret

State & Federal Trade Secret Laws

Using Slogans (Taglines), Model Numbers as Trademarks

Which format? When Should I  Use Standard Characters?

Shop Rights  What is a Small or Micro Entity?

Patent Drawings

Opposition Pleadings    UDRP Elements    

Oppositions-The Underdog    Misc Changes to TTAB Rules 2017

How To Answer A Trademark Cease and Desist Letter

Converting Provisional to Nonprovisional Patent Application (or claiming benefit of)

Trademark Refusals    Does not Function as a Mark Refusals

How to Respond to Office Actions

What is a Compact Patent Prosecution?

Acceptable Specimen       Supplemental Register   $224 Statement of Use

How To Show Acquired Distinctiveness Under 2(f)

Patent search-New invention

Patent Search-Non-Obvious

Why Not Just Patents? Functional Trademarks   How to Trademark     

What Does ‘Use in Commerce’ Mean?    

Grounds for Opposition & Cancellation     Cease and Desist Letter

Trademark Incontestability  TTAB Manual (TBMP)

Valid/Invalid Use of Trademarks     Trademark Searching

TTAB/TBMP Discovery Conferences & Stipulations

TBMP 113 Service of TTAB Documents  TBMP 309 Standing

Examples and General Rules for Likelihood of Confusion

USPTO Search Method for Likelihood of Confusion

Examples of Refusals for Likelihood of Confusion   DuPont Factors

What are Dead or Abandoned Trademarks?

 Can I Use An Abandoned Trademark?

Color as Trade Dress  3D Marks as Trade Dress  

Can I Abandon a Trademark During An Opposition?

Differences between TEAS and TEAS plus  

How do I Know If Someone Has Filed for An Extension of Time to Oppose?

Ornamental Refusal  Standard TTAB Protective Order

SCAM Letters Surname Refusal


What Does Published for Opposition Mean?

What to Discuss in the Discovery Conference

Descriptive Trademarks Trademark2e.com  

Likelihood of Confusion 2d

Acquired Distinctiveness  2(f) or 2(f) in part

Merely Descriptive Trademarks  

Merely Descriptive Refusals

ID of Goods and Services see also Headings (list) of International Trademark Classes

Register a Trademark-Step by Step  

Protect Business Goodwill Extension of Time to Oppose

Geographically Descriptive or Deceptive

Change of Address with the TTAB using ESTTA

Likelihood of confusion-Circuit Court tests

Pseudo Marks    How to Reply to Cease and Desist Letter

Not Just Patents Often Represents the Underdog

 Overcome Merely Descriptive Refusal   Overcome Likelihood Confusion

Protecting Trademark Rights (Common Law)

Steps in a Trademark Opposition Process   

Section 2(d) Refusals   FilingforTrademark.com

Zombie Trademark  

What is the Difference between Principal & Supplemental Register?

Typical Brand Name Refusals  What is a Family of Marks? What If Someone Files An Opposition Against My Trademark?

How to Respond Office Actions  

DIY Overcoming Descriptive Refusals

Trademark Steps Trademark Registration Answers TESS  

Trademark Searching Using TESS  Trademark Search Tips

Trademark Clearance Search   DIY Trademark Strategies

Published for Opposition     What is Discoverable in a TTAB Proceeding?

Counterclaims and Affirmative Defenses


©2008-2017 All Rights Reserved. Not Just Patents LLC, PO Box 18716, Minneapolis, MN 55418.

Call: 1-651-500-7590 or email: WP@NJP.legal. This site is for informational purposes only and is provided without warranties, express or implied, regarding the information's accuracy, timeliness, or completeness and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney/client relationship exists without a written contract between Not Just Patents LLC and its client. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Privacy Policy Contact Us

 

DescriptiveTrademark.com


Not Just Patents®

Aim Higher® Facts Matter

Not Just Patents® LLC

PO Box 18716

Minneapolis, MN 55418

1-651-500-7590

WP@NJP.legal