The TTAB recently ruled on the appeals from three Section
2(e)(1) mere descriptiveness refusals summarized below. Let's
see how you do with them, keeping in mind that last year the Board
affirmed, by my calculation, about 93% these refusals. Answer(s)
will be found in the first comment.
In re Friendship Retirement Corporation, Serial No.
87942568 (October 29, 2020) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge
David K. Heasley). [Mere descriptiveness refusal
of CENTER FOR MODERN AGING for
"providing assisted living facilities" and for
"continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs) in the nature
of nursing home services." Applicant maintained that the
Examining Attorney erroneously dissected the proposed mark into its
constituent words, each of which has a wide variety of definitions.
Applicant claimed that "[w]hen the mark is read as a whole, it
is suggestive and invites the consumer to seek out the products and
services for further evaluation."]
