TTAB Releases October 2022 Hearing Schedule: Nine Virtual Hearings and Three In-Person Hearings – Trademark

To print this article, all you need to do is be registered or log in to

The brand Trial and Appeal Board (Tee-Tee-Ā-Bee) has scheduled twelve (12!!) oral hearings for the month of October 2022. The second, fifth and tenth hearings listed below will be held in person; the rest will take place by videoconference. Briefs and other documents for each case can be found at TTABVIEW through the links provided.


October 5, 2022 – 1 p.m.: In re Lizzo LLCserial numbers 88466281 and 88466264
[Refusal to register 100% THAT BITCH for
musical recordings and entertainment service on the ground that the
proposed mark is a widely used phrase that fails to function as a
source indicator.]


October 6, 2022 – 2 p.m. (in person): In re Wave Neuroscience, Inc.Serial number 88796139
[Section 2(e)(1) mere descriptiveness refusal of NEURO
 for medical products and services relating to
the analysis and treatment of analysis and treatment of
neurological disorders.]


October 11, 2022 – 11 a.m.: Little Free Library, Ltd. against Little Legacy Library LLCobjection no. 91264613 [Opposition to registration
seminars, and podcasts in the fields of personal development,
success, achievement, entrepreneurship, and fiscal responsibility,
on the ground of likelihood of confusion with the registered
mark LITTLE FREE LIBRARY for signs,
guestbooks, cabinetry construction, and book exchange website


October 12, 2022 – 1 p.m.: Advance Magazine Publishers Inc. v. Anna Gonchorovaoppositions nos 91245771, 91253089 and 91254140 [Opposition to
of WIRED and WIRED.FIT for
clothing and for fitness boot camps, fitness instruction services,
and the like, on the ground of likelihood of confusion with, and
likely dilution of, the registered
mark WIRED for magazines and online
informational services in the fields of lifestyle, culture, and


October 13, 022 – 2 p.m. (in person): In re Baxter SrlSerial number 90172106 [Section 2(d)
refusal of the mark BAXTER for carpets
and rugs, excluding bath mats and for related retail store
services, in view of the registered mark CHASING
 for bath mats.]


October 18, 2022 – 10 a.m.: Comptime, Inc. DBA Comptime Digital Printing v E. Francis Paper, Inc.Cancellation No. 92073884 [Petitioner for
cancellation of a registration for the mark LITTLE
 for address books, greeting cards, calendars,
note paper, and the like, on the ground of likelihood of confusion
with petitioner’s identical common law mark for overlapping


October 18, 2022 – 1 p.m.: In re The New York Times Companyserial numbers 90106071, 90112154, 90112577, 90115155, 90115337 and 90115491 [Refusal to
register the marks THE NEW OLD
, and OFF THE SHELF for
“columns on the subject of business, office, money, careers
and worklife balance” and for “providing on-line
publications in the nature of articles, columns” on the ground
that the mark identifies only a portion of applicant’s
publications and does not identify “separate goods in


October 19, 2022 – 1 p.m.: Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc. v. Fashion Electronics, Inc.objection no. 91247034 [Opposition to registration
of EVOGUE for battery chargers, cell
phone cases, headphones, carrying cases, handheld digital music
players, protective covers for mobile phones, laptops, and portable
media players, and wireless speakers, on the grounds of likelihood
of confusion with and likely dilution of the registered
mark VOGUE for, inter
, magazines and mobile phone software.]


October 20, 2022 – 1 p.m.: In re Chatham International IncorporatedSerial number 90114379 [Section 2(d) refusal of STRONG
 for “alcoholic beverages, except
beer,” in view of the registered mark STRONG
 for “Beer, ale, lager, stout and


October 25, 2022 – 11 a.m. (in person): In re PT Medisafe TechnologiesSerial number 88083209
[Refusal to register the color dark green (Pantone No. 3285 c) for
“Chloroprene medical examination gloves sold only to
authorized resellers,” on the ground of genericness, or on the
alternative ground that the proposed mark is not inherently
distinctive and lacks acquired distinctiveness.]


October 26, 2022 – 11 a.m.: In re CE Shepherd Company, LLCSerial number 88636382
[Refusal to register MODULAR GABION
 for “Gabions of steel wire”on the
grounds of genericness or, alternatively, mere descriptiveness and
lack of acquired distinctiveness.]


October 27, 2022 – 2 p.m.: D&P Holding SA. vs. José Ramon Ortiz Monastery DBA José Ramonobjection no. 91246728 [Opposition to registration
of the mark shown below, for “Beer-based cocktails; Essences
used in the preparation of liqueurs; Malt extracts for making beer;
Non-alcoholic rice-based beverages not being milk substitutes;
Smoothies; Soy-based beverages not being milk substitutes;
Soya-based beverages, other than milk substitutes; Syrups for
beverages; Syrups for making beverages,” on the ground of lack
of bona fide intent.]


Read comments and post your comment here.

TTABlog comment: Predictions? See WYHA or WYHO or WYHP?

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide on the subject. Specialist advice should be sought regarding your particular situation.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: United States Intellectual Property

IP and NFT: where are we?

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Acclaimed director Quentin Tarantino and production company Miramax have settled their non-fungible token (“NFT”) infringement lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California…

Be careful what you give

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP

In In re: John Bradley McDonald, LLC, No. 2021-1697 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 10, 2022), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) upheld a patent lawsuit ruling. .

Creative Claims Strategies

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP

Innovative biopharmaceutical companies turn to their patent attorney for creative patent claim strategies to protect their assets.


One Response

  1. October 7, 2022

Add Comment

%d bloggers like this: