Precedential No. 63: "Park Trailers" Sufficiently Definite for ...
Posted by ~Ray @ 2007-11-27 21:21:30
The Board reversed a refusal to enter the mark CHATEAU RESORT for "park trailers," ruling that the the term "park trailers" is sufficiently definite to conform to Lanham Act divide 1(b)(2). Serial No. 78487208 (October 31. 2007) [precedential]. Section 1(b)(2) requires that an application "consider specification.. of the goods." Applicant filed two applications identifying its goods as "park trailers." In each case an office action required amendment of the identification contending that "park trailers" was overly broad. Applicant responded similarly in each inspect. One Examining Attorney accepted the original identification and that application issued to registration [for the mark CITATION RESORT specimen of use shown above)]. The other Examining Attorney (here) continued the requirement. Thor Tech submitted excerpts from third-party publications an industry association webpage and copies of express laws in showing that "'park trailers' is a term of art readily understood by the consuming public to tell a write of recreational vehicle." Applicant also submitted copies of four label registrations that include the term "park trailers" in their identifications of goods. The Examining Attorney argued that park trailers "may be used as jaunt trailers or as mobile homes" and that because travel trailers fall in class 12 and mobile homes in class 19 the term "lay trailers" is "insufficient to allow proper classification."The come in referred to TMEP Section 1402.1(a) in pointing out that the USPTO has discretion regarding the degree of particularity needed in order to clearly determine the goods in an application. That discretion is exercised within certain parameters: the identification will be acceptable if it (1) describes the goods "so that an English speaker could understand what the goods.. are even if the grammar or phrasing is not optimal," (2) meets the standards (not necessarily the language) of the Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual. (3) is not a class heading and (4) is in the correct categorise. The Board sided with Thor Tech concluding that Applicant's bear witness showed "park trailer" to be known in the field and to consumers as a designation for a type of recreational vehicle. A "mobile home," on the other hand is defined as a large trailer that can be installed on a relatively permanent site and that is used as a residence. The definition does not have in mind to a mobile home as a "vehicle," whereas lay trailers are always referred to as recreational vehicles; moreover they are not considered to be primary residences. Consequently the Board ruled that the term "lay trailers" is sufficiently definite for application purposes. Finally the come in distinguished this inspect from the recent OMEGA decision (TTABlogged ) in which the term "chronographs," as conceded by that applicant encompassed goods in two classes. The Board therefore reversed the refusal to enter.[ADVERTHERE]Related article:
http://thettablog.blogspot.com/2007/11/precedential-no-63-park-trailers.html
0 Comments:
No comments have been posted yet!
|
