Renaissance Energy, LLC

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

May 25, 2007

No. 78084358 (T.T.A.B. May. 25, 2007)

Mailed:
May 25, 2007

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________

In re Renaissance Energy, LLC
________

Serial No. 78084358
_______

Garrett M. Weber of Lindquist & Vennum P.L.L.P. for
Renaissance Energy, LLC.

Laura G. Kovalsky, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office
110 (Chris A. F. Pedersen, Managing Attorney).
_______

Before Drost, Taylor and Bergsman, Administrative Trademark
Judges.

Opinion by Bergsman, Administrative Trademark Judge:

Renaissance Energy, LLC filed an intent-to-use
application for the mark LINK & SYNC, in standard character
form, for services ultimately identified as “energy usage
management, namely, monitoring of load and generation of
electricity.”1 On June 10, 2005, applicant filed a
Statement of Use, claiming March 16, 2004 as its date of
first use anywhere and first use in commerce. As its

1 Application Serial No. 78084358, filed September 18, 2001.
THIS OPINION IS NOT A
PRECEDENT OF THE TTAB
Serial No. 78084358
2
specimen of use, applicant submitted the following excerpt
from a sales presentation:

Registration was refused on the ground that LINK &
SYNC fails to function as a service mark. Sections 1, 2,
3, and 45 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1052, 1053
and 1127. The examining attorney contends that as
displayed on the specimen, LINK AND SYNC merely identifies
a process or system, and would not be perceived as a
service mark. In addition, the examining attorney noted
that the mark sought to be registered, LINK & SYNC,
differed from the mark as shown on the specimen, LINK AND
SYNC.
Serial No. 78084358
3
In response to the refusal, applicant submitted a
substitute specimen comprising an excerpt from an Executive
Summary from what appears to be a business plan or sales
presentation. The substitute specimen references the “LINK
& SYNC technology” and the “LINK & SYNC solution.”
When the refusal was made final, applicant appealed.
Both applicant and the examining attorney filed briefs.
For the reasons set forth below, we reverse the refusal to
register contingent upon the receipt of a substitute
drawing displaying the mark as LINK AND SYNC.2
Section 1 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1051, provides
that “The owner of a trademark used in commerce may request
registration of its trademark on the principal register
hereby established . . .”
Section 45 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1127, defines
a service mark as “any word, name, symbol, or device, or
any combination thereof . . . to identify and distinguish
the services or one person, including a unique service,
from the services of others and to indicate the source of
the services, even if that source is unknown.”

2 Because an ampersand (&) is a symbol for the word “and,” “Link
and Sync” and “Link & Sync” are interchangeable. See In re
Finlay Fine Jewelry Corp., 41 USPQ2d 1152, 1154 (TTAB 1996)(“NY”
and “New York” are interchangeable as having identical meaning).
Accord In re Strathmore Products, Inc., 136 USPQ 81, 82 (TTAB
1962)(GLISTEN and GLISS’N have the same meaning because GLISS’N
is merely a contraction of the word GLISTEN).
Serial No. 78084358
4
While the Lanham Act does not define a service, the
following criteria have evolved for determining what
constitutes a service: (1) a service must be a real
activity; (2) a service must be performed to the order of,
or for the benefit of, someone other than the applicant;
and (3) the activity performed must be qualitatively
different from anything necessarily done in connection with
the sale of the applicant’s goods or the performance of
another service. TMEP §1301.01(a)(4th ed. April 2005). See
also In re Canadian Pacific Limited, 754 F.2d 992, 224 USPQ
971, 973 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Betz Paperchem, Inc., 222
USPQ 89, 90 (TTAB 1984).
In the case sub judice, there is no issue that
applicant is rendering energy usage management. The
examining attorney does not contest this. The examining
attorney argues that the specimens do not show LINK AND
SYNC or LINK & SYNC used as a service mark. The first
specimen merely “diagrams the process of the ‘Link and Sync
Control Center’” and the substitute specimen references the
“Link & Sync Technology.” The examining attorney contends
that in neither case, do the specimens show LINK & SYNC or
LINK AND SYNC used to identify a service.
To determine whether LINK AND SYNC or LINK & SYNC
function as service marks, we must examine the specimens.
Serial No. 78084358
5
In re Hughes Aircraft Co., 222 USPQ 265, 264 (TTAB 1984);
In re Betz Paperchem, Inc., supra. In this regard, the
CCPA developed the following approach for determining
whether a term used as the name of a process also functions
as a service mark:
The requirement [of the Lanham Act]
that a mark must be “used in the sale
or advertising of services” to be
registered as a service mark is clear
and specific. We think it is not met
by evidence which only shows use of the
mark as the name of a process and that
the company is in the business of
rendering services generally, even
though the advertising of services
appears in the same brochure in which
the name of the process is used. The
minimum requirement is some direct
association between the offer of
services and the mark sought to be
registered therefore.

In re Universal Oil Products Company, 476 F.2d 653, 177
USPQ 456, 457 (CCPA 1973).
With reference to the original specimen (shown above),
LINK AND SYNC is displayed as “Link and Sync (tm) Operation”
in a sales presentation. The word “Operation” means “the
state of being operative or functional,”3 “a business,”4 or

3 American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th ed.
2006). The Board may take judicial notice of dictionary
definitions. University of Notre Dame du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet
Food Imports Co., 213 USPQ 594 (TTAB 1982), aff’d, 703 F.2d 1372,
217 USPQ 505 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
4 Dictionary.com Unabridged (V 1.1) from the Random House
Unabridged Dictionary (2006).
Serial No. 78084358
6
“a course or procedure of productive or industrial
activity.”5 The commercial impression created by the
specimen is a “Link and Sync” activity or service. If we
substituted the word “Services” for “Operation” (i.e.,
“Link and Sync (tm) Services”), the commercial impression
engendered by the mark would be the same (i.e., Link and
Sync Business or Link and Sync Activity”). In addition,
because of the position, prominence, and size of “Link and
Sync,” it will be understood to be a service mark.
“Link and Sync” is directly associated with the energy
management services as evidenced by the text in the lower
right-hand side of the specimen. That text reads as
follows:
To monitor and control . . . both wind
plant production and loads, Link and
Sync [services] uses the following
communication mediums:

A. Power Systems Carrier

B. Copper and fiber leased telephone
lines

C. Microwave

D. Radio

In view of the foregoing, we find that the original
specimen shows service mark use of “Link and Sync.” On the
other hand, the Executive Summary submitted as a substitute

5 Id.
Serial No. 78084358
7
specimen does not evidence service mark use. In the
Executive Summary, “Link & Sync” identifies the method or
process for energy management as shown by the use of the
term “Link & Sync technology.” The relevant portion of the
Executive Summary is set forth below (emphasis added):
The Company’s core objective is to
optimize the amount of generation that
can be interconnected to the delivery
system, that generation will be
reliably scheduled and delivered to the
target customer using the newly
developed Link & Sync technology.
Renaissance Energy developed Link &
Sync technology.

By using Link & Sync technology, which
is a certified and tested application,
Renaissance Energy can reliably
maintain linkage of dedicated
generation to dedicated load . . .

Renaissance Energy's unique development
and integration of Link & Sync
technology brings to realization the
core objectives with a minimal amount
of added infrastructure. . . . With
Link & Sync technology, Renaissance
Energy provides its customers a
competitive advantage in linking wind
generation through the transmission and
distribution system to the point of
wind energy use.

By providing the Link & Sync solution
for power producers, utilities, and
most importantly consumers, Renaissance
Energy makes wind generation appear
dispacthable (sic). This
dispatchability is at the core of the
Link & Sync technology and will be a
real breakthrough for the electrical
and energy industry.
Serial No. 78084358
8
As used in the Executive Summary, clients and
prospective clients would not perceive “Link & Sync” to be
a service mark. The word “technology” means “a
technological process, invention, method, or the like.”6
When applicant uses the phrase “Link & Sync technology,” it
engenders the commercial impression of the “Link & Sync
process.” The same holds true with respect to the use of
“Link & Sync solution.” The word “solution” means “a
particular instance or method of solving; an explanation or
answer”7 or “the method or process of solving a problem.”8
When applicant uses the phrase “Link & Sync solution,” it,
too, engenders the commercial impression of the “Link &
Sync process.” Accordingly, the Executive Summary is not
an acceptable specimen of service mark use.
Decision: The refusal to register the mark is
reversed contingent upon applicant filing a new drawing to
amend the mark to conform to the mark shown in the original
specimen (i.e., LINK AND SYNC). Applicant is allowed
thirty days from the mailing date of this decision to file
an amended drawing which conforms to the mark as used on
the specimen found to display acceptable service mark use.

6 Dictionary.com Unabridged (V 1.1) from the Random House
Unabridged Dictionary (2006).
7 Id.
8 American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th ed.
2006).