Manhattan Scientifics, Inc.Download PDFTrademark Trial and Appeal BoardNov 26, 2002No. 76039649re (T.T.A.B. Nov. 26, 2002) Copy Citation Paper No. 16 Mailed: November 26, 2002 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ________ Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ________ In re Manhattan Scientifics, Inc. ________ Serial No. 76/039,649 _______ Request for Reconsideration _______ James C. Wray for applicant. Johanna B. Robinson, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 104 (Sidney I. Moskowitz, Managing Attorney). _______ Before Cissel, Seeherman and Quinn, Administrative Trademark Judges. Opinion by Quinn, Administrative Trademark Judge: The Board, in a decision dated October 4, 2002, affirmed the refusal to register under Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act on the basis that the mark HYDROCYCLE, if applied to “operator controlled motor propelled road vehicles, namely, hydrogen fueled bicycles,” would be merely descriptive thereof. The Board considered dictionary definitions of “hydro” meaning “hydrogen” and “cycle” meaning “bicycle.” When the terms “hydro” and THIS DECISION IS NOT CITABLE AS PRECEDENT OF THE TTAB 2 “cycle” are combined, the mark HYDROCYCLE, as a whole, is merely descriptive of hydrogen-fueled bicycles. Applicant has timely filed a request for reconsideration. In maintaining that the Board committed error in affirming the refusal to register, applicant argues that the Board improperly dissected the mark; that there are no descriptive uses of HYDROCYCLE in the NEXIS excerpts of record; that the term “hydro” has meanings other than “hydrogen”; that the mark is suggestive; and that any doubt on mere descriptiveness must be resolved in applicant’s favor. Applicant’s concerns were considered in our original opinion, and nothing raised by applicant on reconsideration compels us to reach a different result. Applicant and others in the field have developed hydrogen-fueled bicycles. The readily recognized meanings of “hydro” and “cycle” include “hydrogen” and “bicycle,” respectively, so that the mark HYDROCYCLE merely describes a significant characteristic or feature of applicant’s goods, namely that they are bicycles powered by hydrogen fuel. We have no doubts about our determination as to which side of the suggestive/merely descriptive line applicant’s proposed mark falls on. 3 The request for reconsideration is denied, and the decision dated October 4, 2002 stands. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation