Land O Sky, LLCDownload PDFTrademark Trial and Appeal BoardFeb 3, 2010No. 76633814re (T.T.A.B. Feb. 3, 2010) Copy Citation Mailed: February 3, 2010 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ________ Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ________ In re Land O Sky, LLC ________ Serial No. 76633814 Serial No. 76633815 _______ REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION _______ Richard M. Moose of Dority & Manning, P.A. for Land O Sky, LLC. Drew Leaser, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 112 (Angela Bishop Wilson, Managing Attorney). _______ Before Bucher, Cataldo and Bergsman, Administrative Trademark Judges. Opinion by Bergsman, Administrative Trademark Judge: Land O Sky, LLC filed intent-to-use applications for the HARVEST FARMS and design marks, shown below. 1 2 1 Serial No. 76633814. Applicant disclaimed the exclusive right to use “Farms” and “Organic.” 2 Serial No. 76633815. Applicant disclaimed the exclusive right to use “Farms” and “Natural.” THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT OF THE T.T.A.B. Serial No. 76633814 Serial No. 76633815 2 In a decision mailed January 4, 2010, the Board affirmed the refusal to register the applications for the goods identified in Classes 29 and 30 on the ground that applicant’s marks are likely to cause confusion with the mark HARVEST FARMS, in typed drawing form, for “cheese.”3 On February 2, 2010, applicant filed a request for reconsideration of the January 4, 2010 decision. As grounds for reconsideration, applicant contends that the Board improperly analyzed the similarity of the marks because we did not give any weight to the postage stamp motif in applicant’s marks. Specifically, applicant argued, [W]hen compared to the cited registration of record, the postage stamp motif serves as a distinctive identifier of source with respect to the International Classes 29 and 30 goods listed in [applicant’s] trademark applications. Given that the postage stamp motif of [applicant’s] mark (sic) differs from any imagery or other aspects of the cited registrations of record, particularly in connection with International Classes 29 and 30 goods,, (sic) the postage stamp motiff (sic) would stand out in the minds of consumers as the dominant portion of [applicant’s] marks.4 3 Registration No. 2603303, issued August 6, 2002; Sections 8 and 15 affidavits accepted and acknowledged. Registrant disclaimed the exclusive right to use “Farms.” 4 Request for Reconsideration, p. 4. Serial No. 76633814 Serial No. 76633815 3 Applicant’s request for reconsideration is based on the false premise that we did not consider the marks in their entireties because we did not specifically reference the postage stamp motif in our analysis. We did not mention the postage stamp motif in our analysis because we found that it had such a minimal effect in creating the commercial impression engendered by applicant’s marks that it would be perceived only as forming a border for the farm scene and name HARVEST FARMS. The serrated edges of the marks forming the postage stamp motif does not in any way divert the dominant commercial impression created by the marks from the name HARVEST FARMS. Decision: Applicant’s request for reconsideration is denied. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation