<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
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 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 12:34 PM, Sam Castree via
E-trademarks wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAKU8sWY9pSrcGPePKSHAAF-bCGvWHtzUN8seLAdJbdjEk3kfVA@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<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:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px">
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:times new roman,serif">
<p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing"
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"
data-smartmail="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" moz-do-not-send="true">lo-dp.com</a>
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 class="msg5466355051708986075">
<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 class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>