The USPTO issued a Section 2(e)(1) refusal of the mark
ARTIZEN, in standard character and stylized form,
finding it to be merely descriptive of essential oils and related
products. On appeal, applicant argued that ARTIZEN has a double
meaning, that consumers will see the play on the word
"zen," and therefore that the mark creates "a
suggestive significance and separate and distinct commercial
impression" such that any descriptive significance is lost.
How do you think this came out? In re Choice Traders LLC, Serial Nos.
87770413 and 87950215 (March 31, 2020) [not precedential] (Opinion
by Judge David K. Heasley).
The Board observed that essential oils are "essential"
not because they are necessary, but because they carry the
fragrance or "essence" of the plants from which they are
extracted. The examining attorney maintained that because the
extraction and distillation of these oils requires skilled
handiwork by artisans, the oils are commonly described in
