Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
Patent and Trademark Office (P.T.O.)
RE: TRADEMARK REGISTRATION OF JOHN LABATT
LIMITED
Registration No. 1,324,918
July 31, 1992
*1 Petition Filed: December 11, 1991
For: JL JOHN LABATT'S EXTRA STOCK and Design
Issued: March 12, 1985
Attorney for Petitioner
Joseph A. DeGrandi, Esq.
Beveridge, DeGrandi & Weilacher
Jeffrey M. Samuels
Assistant Commissioner for Trademarks
On Petition
John LaBatt Limited has
petitioned the Commissioner to overrule the decision of the Trademark
Applications Examiner in the Post-Registration Section, and allow amendment of
the above-captioned mark pursuant to Section 7 of the Trademark Act. Trademark
Rule 2.176 provides appropriate authority for the requested review.
The subject registration
issued on March 12, 1985 for the mark JL JOHN LABATT'S EXTRA STOCK and Design.
Pursuant to Section 8 of the Trademark Act, registrant was required to file an
affidavit or declaration of continued use or excusable nonuse between the fifth
and sixth year after the registration date, i.e., between March 12, 1990 and
March 12, 1991. On March 23, 1990, the registrant timely filed a combined
Section 8 and 15 declaration. By letter dated June 26, 1990, the Trademark
Examining Attorney rejected the combined declaration because the specimen did
not show use of the registered mark.
On November 26, 1990, the
registrant filed a request for amendment of the registration under Trademark
Act 7(e), seeking to change the drawing to comport with the rejected specimen.
[FN1] The registered mark and the mark currently in use are shown below:
TABULAR OR GRAPHIC MATERIAL SET FORTH AT THIS POINT IS NOT
DISPLAYABLE
By letter dated February 13, 1991, the Trademark Applications Examiner
refused the request on the ground that the registrant sought to add new words
and design elements to the registration, which were never searched or published
for opposition. On August 7, 1991, the registrant filed a request for
reconsideration of the refusal, arguing that the essential elements of the mark
remained the same, and the new elements had been searched and published in
conjunction with another of the registrant's marks, Registration 1,423,165.
TABULAR OR GRAPHIC MATERIAL SET FORTH AT THIS POINT IS NOT
DISPLAYABLE
By letter dated October
15, 1991, the refusal to amend the mark was continued. The Trademark
Applications Examiner noted that the proposed amendment represented a material
alteration to the character and consumer impression of the mark, that the
visual impression was dramatically different, and that the registrant had so
redesigned the mark as to create a new mark. The examiner further noted that,
since each case must be decided on its own merits, the registrant's other
registration could not be used as a guideline to refuse or allow the proposed
amendment. This petition was timely filed on December 11, 1991.
Trademark Rule
2.146(a)(3) permits the Commissioner to invoke his supervisory authority in
appropriate circumstances. However, the Commissioner will reverse the action of
an Examiner in a case such as this only where there has been a clear error or
abuse of discretion. In re Richards-Wilcox Manufacturing Co., 181 USPQ 735 (Comm'r Pats.1974); Ex parte
Peerless Confection Co., 142 USPQ 278 (Comm'r Pats.1964).
*2 Section 7(e) of
the Trademark Act permits the Commissioner to accept an amendment to a
registration provided that the amendment does not materially alter the
character of the mark. Petitioner argues that the dominant features of the
registered mark "are the words JOHN LABATT'S EXTRA STOCK and the stylized
letters JL", and that these dominant features, "except for the word
JOHN are present in the amended mark". As to the differences in the design
elements, the petitioner refers to its ownership of a registration
incorporating the same design, and cites cases holding that designs are
subordinate to words in creating the dominant commercial impression of the
mark.
There is an exception to
the material alteration rule wherein the Office has permitted the addition of
the applicant's registered mark to a mark sought to be registered. Florasynth
Laboratories, Inc. v. Mulhens, 122 USPQ 284 (Comm'r of Patents 1959) (applicant
permitted to change application from ELAN to 4711 ELAN where mark 4711 already
registered). The rationale is "[t]he addition of applicant's well-known
registered mark to the mark sought to be registered ... is not a material
change which would require republication of the mark." Accord In re
Nationwide Industries Inc., 6 U.S.P.Q.2d 1882 (TTAB 1988) (addition of
registered matter refused where goods in application not the same as those in registration). [FN1] Here, the
applicant does not seek to merely add an element from one registration to
another. Rather, the applicant seeks to eliminate its original mark, and
substitute another. The exception to the material alteration rule clearly does
not encompass cases where the original mark disappears.
Whether republication
would be required is only one consideration in the determination of whether a
mark has been materially changed. Moreover, the test for whether a mark has
been materially altered does not depend on whether the dominant portion of the
original mark is still present in the amended form. The question is whether the
proposed mark has a different commercial impression.
Contrary to the
petitioner's argument, the number and nature of the changes to the mark, in
both the literal and the design elements, are such to support the Applications
Examiner's conclusion that the petitioner has created a new mark with a
different commercial impression. The mark as registered features a dark oval
against a square label, with the letters JL filling most of the oval, and the
words EXTRA STOCK superimposed, in smaller letters, over the JL. Across the top
of the oval, in letters less than half the size of the EXTRA STOCK, are the
words JOHN LABATT'S. Appearing on the bottom of the oval is a circular emblem
showing a cabin.
The proposed amendment to
the mark eliminates the dark oval, the square label, the large letters JL, the
word JOHN, and the circular emblem featuring a cabin.
The addition of Registration 1,423,165 not only introduces new design elements,
but changes the presentation of the words EXTRA STOCK, and alters the formerly
unobtrusive display of the surname to make LABATT'S the most striking portion
of the mark. In these circumstances, the Trademark Applications Examiner cannot
be said to have erred or abused her discretion in refusing to allow the
amendment.
*3 The petition is
denied. The registration file will be forwarded to the Post-Registration
Section for action in accordance with this decision.
FN1. The request for amendment was accompanied by a request to
suspend action on the Section 8 filing pending the outcome of the request for
amendment.
FN1. Because the mark subject to this petition is used with
"malt beer", and Registration 1,423,165 features "alcoholic
brewery beverages, specifically ale and lager", which fit within the
broader term "malt beer", the identity of the goods is not in issue
here.
25 U.S.P.Q.2d 1801
END OF DOCUMENT