Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 03 APRIL 2020

TTABlog Test: How Did These Four Appeals From Mere Descriptiveness Refusals Turn Out?

Wolf Greenfield & Sacks
Wolf Greenfield & Sacks
Contributor
Wolf Greenfield & Sacks

Wolf Greenfield & Sacks

Wolf, Greenfield is one of the 10 largest law firms in the United States devoted exclusively to...

View firm profile
Explore more from Wolf Greenfield & Sacks

The TTAB recently ruled on the appeals from the four Section 2(e)(1) mere descriptiveness refusals summarized below.

United StatesIntellectual Property

The TTAB recently ruled on the appeals from the four Section 2(e)(1) mere descriptiveness refusals summarized below. Let's see how you do with them, keeping in mind that the Board affirms, by my calculation, some 90% of these refusals. Answer(s) will be found in the first comment.

912214a.jpg

In re DeSean Ramsey DBA BearArms Bracelets, Serial No. 87708731 (March 18, 2020) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Cindy B. Greenbaum). [Mere descriptiveness refusal of BULLET BRACELET for "Bracelets; Bracelets made of paracord; Jewelry" [BRACELET disclaimed]. Applicant argued that its goods are made from spent (fired) or empty pistol shell casings and paracord, rather than actual bullets.].

912214b.jpg

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from