United States:
TTABlog Test: Is “GOAT GREATEST OF ALL TIME” Merely Descriptive Of Vodka?
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
TTABlog Test: Is “GOAT GREATEST OF ALL TIME” Merely
Descriptive of Vodka?
AAN Holding, LLC. applied to register the mark GOAT
GREATEST OF ALL TIME for vodka, but the USPTO refused
registration on the ground of Section 2(e)(1) mere descriptiveness.
Applicant pointed to five Principal Register registrations for
marks that include a variation of GOAT GREATEST OF ALL TIME without
disclaimer or Section 2(f) claim, arguing that these registrations
“show an Office practice of allowing GOAT GREATEST OF ALL TIME
and other common phrases and expressions to register.” How do
you think this came out? In re AAN Holdings, LLC, Serial No.
88130411 (December 6, 20201) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge
Marc A. Bergsman).
There was no disagreement that GOAT stands for GREATEST OF ALL
TIME [See Brady, Tom – ed.]. The question, then,
was whether that phrase is merely descriptive of vodka. Yes, said
the Board. “GOAT GREATEST OF ALL TIME is a laudatory term. ***
The Federal Circuit and this Board have held that other marks which
arguably denote ‘high quality,’ ‘excellence’ and
‘superior quality’ are laudatory and, thus, merely
descriptive.” [for example, CONSISTENTLY SUPERIOR, QUESO
QUESADILLA SUPREME, SELECT and its equivalent SELECTA, PREFERRED,
and AMERICA’S BEST POPCORN]. The Board opined that GOAT
GREATEST OF ALL TIME “is as laudatory, if not more so,”
than the marks cited above. [How more laudatory could you get? -
ed.].
The Board found applicant’s evidence of five prior
registrations [for medicated soaps, restaurant services, clothing,
paper products, and retail fishing equipment services] to be not
that great. Brushing them aside, the Board observed once again that
it must decide each case on its own merits, and it is not bound by
registration decisions in other cases, even if some characteristics
are similar. Moreover, the Board noted, the evidentiary landscape
for the descriptiveness analysis likely differed at the time of
these registrations, the earliest of which dates back to
2006.”
And so, the Board affirmed the refusal.
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.
POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Intellectual Property from United States
