The Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure ("TMEP") Chapter 1200 provides an extensive list of substantive grounds for refusing a trademark application. A trademark refusal is typically conveyed in the Office Action issued by the assigned Examining Attorney. Within the Office Action, the Examiner will outline the specific refusal(s), which may encompass multiple grounds, and provide a rationale supported by relevant case law. As the applicant, you or your trademark attorney will have the opportunity to respond to the refusal. This section will discuss the most frequently encountered grounds for trademark refusal.
During the review process of a trademark application by the United States Patent & Trademark Office ("USPTO"), a search is conducted to identify conflicting marks. A mark in the application is deemed "conflicting" if it presents a "likelihood of confusion" with a registered trademark. In the Office Action, the registered mark(s) will be cited, and it will be explained how the proposed mark resembles the cited mark, leading to potential consumer confusion, mistaken identity, or deception regarding the source of goods and/or services offered by the applicant and registrant. The determination of likelihood of confusion is guided by the factors outlined in In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 1361, 177 USPQ 563, 567 (C.C.P.A. 1973). The key factors considered include the similarity of the trademarks and the commercial relationship between the goods and services. Generally, if the marks are similar and the goods and services are related, it is likely that consumers would mistakenly believe that the goods and services originate from the same source.
When a mark directly communicates a quality, purpose, function, feature, characteristic, ingredient, or use of the goods or services, it will be considered merely descriptive and will be rejected for registration on the principal register of the USPTO. Similarly, if a trademark inaccurately describes a quality, purpose, function, feature, characteristic, ingredient, or use of the goods or services, and such misrepresentation could reasonably deceive or mislead consumers, the mark will be refused as deceptively misdescriptive. It is important to note that one of the goals of trademark law is to safeguard consumers from being misled or confused.
When it comes to refusals based on geographic descriptiveness, the USPTO will assess three factors. First, it will determine if the primary significance of the mark is a well-known geographic location to consumers. Second, it will consider whether consumers are likely to believe that the goods or services originate from that geographic location. Lastly, it will verify if the goods or services actually come from the named geographic location. If these three criteria are met, the mark will be rejected for registration on the principal register.
In the case of geographically deceptively misdescriptive refusals, the first two criteria mentioned earlier must be satisfied. Additionally, it must be shown that the goods or services don't originate from the named geographic location in the mark, and that the misrepresentation would significantly influence a substantial portion of relevant consumers when making their purchasing decisions. For instance, if the mark "TRUE FLORIDA" is used for oranges that are not actually grown in Florida, it may be deemed geographically deceptively misdescriptive.
Getting in touch is easy. Use the form below and request a free consultation today.
If the main significance of a trademark is a surname or last name, it will be rejected for registration on the principal register.
If a mark is perceived as primarily ornamental or informational rather than a source indicator, an Examining Attorney will refuse it for registration, as it fails to function as a trademark to distinguish the applicant's goods. For instance, if larger letters, designs, or slogans are prominently displayed across the front of a T-shirt, sweatshirt, or hat, they may be considered decorative features rather than indications of the source.
If you need legal advice regarding your trademark rights, assistance with trademark prosecution, or representation in a domain name dispute, contact Wilson Whitaker Rynell. Our team of trademark lawyers has extensive experience in all aspects of trademark and copyright law, including the filing of trademark applications and representing clients in defense or prosecution before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
Recognized in the legal industry as dedicated board-certified lawyers and Rising Stars.
Your project will be handled by legal experts every time. You will have the most experienced attorneys working for you.
Let's talk about your legal issue
Wilson Legal Group P.C.
d/b/a Wilson Whitaker Rynell
(972) 248-8080 (Dallas) MAIN OFFICE
(713) 830-2207 (Houston) Appointment Only
(512) 691-4100 (Austin) Appointment Only
For more information on how we can assist in your intellectual property, commercial litigation, divorce, or other personal needs, let us know how we can help you:
WILSON WHITAKER RYNELL
Thank You for Contacting Us!
Your information has been sent, and we will contact you shorlty...issues.
WILSON WHITAKER RYNELL
Oops, there was an error sending your message.
Please try again later.
Disclaimer:
This form does not establish an attorney-client relationship, and should only be used to contact the firm about scheduling a call or meeting. No confidential or sensitive information should be sent using this form.
We represent clients nationwide, including Dallas, Austin, Houston, and other Texas areas such as Fort Worth, Arlington, Carrollton, Plano, Allen, Lewisville, Flower Mound, Irving, Denton, McKinney, North Richland Hills, and all cities within Dallas County, Tarrant County, Collin County, and Denton County.
Wilson Whitaker Rynell
16610 Dallas Parkway, Suite 1000
Dallas, Texas 75248
972-248-8080 (MAIN)
972-248-8088 (FAX)
info@wrrlegal.com (E-MAIL)