<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
I think the reason it's hit-or-miss is because it's entirely
capricious. The premise is that three websites (I had only two in a
refusal recently) are somehow representative of an entire industry,
which is just silly. I can't imagine <i>any</i> industry where
three websites could be considered representative. So it just boils
down to an examining attorney's sensibility, fed by the fear that
their action will be reviewed and their work deemed inadequate and a
natural inclination to want to be right. <br>
<br>
I'm curious when they look for related goods and services. If there
are two identical marks, do they always look for proof of
relateness, no matter how distant they are? Dolls and nuclear
reactors? How do they decide they need to do the web search? I've
also had the searches generalized way beyond the actual goods and
services, e.g., "counseling services in the field of baldness"
reduced to "counseling services," with a claim that it's proof that
baldness counseling is related to therapeutic horseback riding
services because they're both counseling (not the actual services,
but you get the point). There <i>is</i> a precedential opinion for
that one, <i>In re OSF Healthcare System,</i> 2023 USPQ2d 1089
(TTAB 2023).<br>
<br>
Pam<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">Pamela S. Chestek<br>
Chestek Legal<br>
300 Fayetteville Street<br>
Unit 2492<br>
Raleigh, NC 27602<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a><br>
(919) 800-8033<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.chesteklegal.com">www.chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/8/2024 1:26 PM, Scott Landsbaum
via E-trademarks wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKHKrb4vNdOvO_XefZ6xAv7G6=BoXeuCH5jBLJ2kB0QCfZtqXw@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">In my experience it's very hit or miss as to
whether an examiner is open to competing evidence of multiple
registrations for the same mark for different goods by different
owners to overcome a 2(d) refusal. Maybe 20% of the time it
works and the rest it doesn't. And of course this has become
extremely difficult because it's so easy, at least in the
consumer products field where massive brands produce almost
everything, for an examiner to find 3 examples of any two goods
sold under the same mark and then issue a refusal. Quite
frustrating.<br clear="all">
<div>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"
data-smartmail="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-size:12.8px"><span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:12.8px"><br>
</span></div>
<div style="font-size:12.8px"><span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:12.8px">Regards,</span><br>
</div>
<div style="font-size:12.8px"><span
style="color:rgb(102,102,204)"><font color="#000000">Scott</font></span></div>
<div style="font-size:12.8px"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-size:12.8px"><span
style="color:rgb(102,102,204);font-size:12.7273px">Scott Landsbaum, Inc.</span></div>
<div style="font-size:12.8px"><span
style="color:rgb(102,102,204)"><a href="tel:323-314-7881"
value="+13233147881"
style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">323-314-7881</a> /
f 323-714-2454 </span></div>
<div style="font-size:12.8px"><span
style="color:rgb(102,102,204)">8306 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 420, Beverly
Hills, CA 90211</span></div>
<div style="font-size:12.8px"><span
style="font-size:12.8px;color:rgb(102,102,204)"><a
href="http://www.scottlandsbaum.com/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.scottlandsbaum.com</a> / </span><font
color="#6666cc"><a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/scottlandsbaum/" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.linkedin.com/in/scottlandsbaum/</a></font><br>
<br
style="color:rgb(102,102,204)">
<font
style="color:rgb(102,102,204)" size="1">NOTICE: This e-mail is intended
solely for the individual
or individuals to whom it
is addressed and may
contain confidential
attorney-client privileged
information and attorney
work product. If you are
not the intended
recipient, please do not
read, forward, print, copy
or distribute it or any of
the information it
contains. Please delete
it immediately and notify
us by return e-mail or by
telephone at <a
href="tel:%28323%29%20314-7881" value="+13233147881"
style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">(323)
314-7881</a>.<br>
<br>
IRS CIRCULAR 230
DISCLOSURE:<span
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;color:rgb(51,51,255)"> </span></font><font
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;color:rgb(102,102,204)"
size="1">Any discussion of
tax matters contained in
this or any email
(including any
attachments) or in any
oral or </font><font
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;color:rgb(102,102,204)"
size="1">other </font><font
style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;color:rgb(102,102,204)"
size="1">written
communication is not
intended to be used and
cannot be used for the
purpose of avoiding U.S.
tax related penalties or
in connection with the
promotion, marketing or
recommendation of any of
the matters addressed in
the communication.</font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 1:15 PM
Pamela Chestek via E-trademarks <<a
href="mailto:e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div> I believe the question was about relatedness of the
goods and services, though, not distinctiveness of the mark.
I have been mulling whether one could find a way to import
the similar standard into relatedness of goods though.<br>
<br>
Pam<br>
<br>
<div>Pamela S. Chestek<br>
Chestek Legal<br>
300 Fayetteville Street<br>
Unit 2492<br>
Raleigh, NC 27602<br>
<a href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a><br>
(919) 800-8033<br>
<a href="http://www.chesteklegal.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>On 2/8/2024 12:34 PM, Sam Castree via E-trademarks
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"times new roman",serif"><span
style="font-size:16px">Dear Diana,</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"times new roman",serif"><span
style="font-size:16px"><br>
</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"times new roman",serif"><span
style="font-size:16px">I've had this issue a handful
of times, although usually the examiner only
provides maybe 2 or 3 examples. I provide a dozen
or two counterexamples, and I lead with this
paragraph:</span></div>
<blockquote
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px">
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"times new roman",serif">
<p
style="margin:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">"Applicant
acknowledges that the PTO's allowance of prior
third-party registrations is not <i>per se</i>
binding on registrations by later applicants.
Nevertheless, third-party registrations can be
relevant to show whether <i>a mark, or a portion
thereof, is descriptive or suggestive</i>. TMEP
§ 1207.01(d)(iii); <i>see also, e.g., Jack
Wolfskin Ausrustung Fur Draussen GmbH & Co.
KGAA v. New Millennium Sports</i>, S.L.U. 797
F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015). Moreover, the Federal
Circuit “encourages the PTO to achieve a uniform
standard for assessing registrability of marks.” <i>In
Re Nett Designs</i>, 236 F.3d 1339, 1342 (Fed.
Cir., 2001). Thus, in the interest of maintaining
uniform standard of registrability, <span
style="font-size:12pt">Applicant submits that <i>[word]</i>,
when applied to <i>[goods]</i>, is at least
suggestive, rather than merely descriptive."</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"times new roman",serif"><span
style="font-size:16px"><br>
</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"times new roman",serif"><span
style="font-size:16px">It's worked pretty well for
me.</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"times new roman",serif"><span
style="font-size:16px"><br>
</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"times new roman",serif"><span
style="font-size:16px">Cheers,</span><br>
</div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div
style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:tahoma;font-size:medium"><span
style="font-family:"times new roman",serif"><span
style="font-size:16px"> </span></span></div>
<div
style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:tahoma;font-size:medium"><span
style="font-family:"times new roman",serif"><span
style="color:rgb(255,102,0);font-size:12pt">Sam<span> Castree,
III</span></span></span></div>
<div
style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:tahoma;font-size:medium"><span
style="font-family:"times new roman",serif"><span
style="color:rgb(255,102,0);font-size:12pt"><br>
</span></span></div>
<div style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:medium"><font
face="times new roman, serif"><span
style="color:rgb(255,102,0);font-size:12pt"><span><i>Sam
Castree Law, LLC</i></span></span></font></div>
<div style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font
face="times new roman, serif"><span
style="color:rgb(255,102,0)"><span><span
style="font-size:12pt"><i>3421 W. Elm
St.</i></span></span></span></font></div>
<div style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font
face="times new roman, serif"><span
style="color:rgb(255,102,0)"><span><span
style="font-size:12pt"><i>McHenry, IL
60050</i></span></span></span></font></div>
<div style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font
face="times new roman, serif"><span
style="color:rgb(255,102,0)"><span><span
style="font-size:12pt"><i>(815) 344-6300</i></span></span></span></font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at
1:36 PM diana <a href="http://lo-dp.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">lo-dp.com</a>
via E-trademarks <<a
href="mailto:e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div><span
style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Interested
in whether anyone has successfully persuaded
TTAB that their volume of evidence in a 2(d)
outweighs the examiner's. Overall issue is
that the USPTO appears to have inconsistent
practice history. Examiner has refused
registration because an identical mark exists
in another class, and there are a variety
examples of companies providing both types of
goods. On the other hand, there are a
substantial number of counter-examples of
coexistence, i.e., Company 1 sells goods in
one of the classes, Company 2 sells goods in
the other class, mark is identical, and they
coexist, without 2(d) ever being issued.
Examiner has issued 2(d) and is sticking by
it, indicating that not bound by what other
examiner do. The evidence in terms of USPTO
records is conflicting, and the USPTO practice
is inconsistent, with many records on both
sides. Does something like this get resolved
on each examiner's whim, or is there something
more predictable and orderly? Thank you!</span></div>
<div><span
style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span
style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Diana
Palchik</span></div>
<div><span
style="font-family:Aptos,Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><a
href="http://palchik.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">palchik.net</a></span></div>
</div>
-- <br>
E-trademarks mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:E-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">E-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
-- <br>
E-trademarks mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:E-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">E-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>