Greater Anchorage, Inc.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Jul 30, 2009

No. 78857617 (T.T.A.B. Jul. 30, 2009)

Mailed:
30 July 2009

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________

In re Greater Anchorage, Inc.
________

Serial No. 78857617
_______

James C. Wray, Esq. for Greater Anchorage, Inc.

Renee Servance, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office
111 (Craig D. Taylor, Managing Attorney).
_______

Before Rogers, Drost, and Kuhlke, Administrative Trademark
Judges.

Opinion by Drost, Administrative Trademark Judge:

On April 10, 2006, Greater Anchorage, Inc. (applicant)
applied to register the mark FUR RENDEZVOUS TEXAS HOLD’EM
TOURNAMENT OF CHAMPIONS ALASKA STATE POKER CHAMPIONSHIP, in
standard character form, on the Principal Register for
“entertainment services in the nature of championship
competitions for playing poker games and card games” in
Class 41. Serial No. 78857617. The application is based
on applicant’s assertion of a date of first use anywhere
THIS OPINION IS NOT A
PRECEDENT OF THE
TTAB
Ser. No. 78857617
2
and in commerce of January 9, 2006. Applicant has
disclaimed the term “TEXAS HOLD’EM.”
The examining attorney1 refused to register the mark on
the ground that the terms “Tournament of Champions Alaska
State Poker Championship,” when used in association with
the services, is merely descriptive. 15 U.S.C.
§ 1052(e)(1). Therefore, the examining attorney required a
disclaimer of that term under the provision of Section 6 of
the Trademark Act. 15 U.S.C. § 1056. After the examining
attorney made the refusal final, applicant filed a request
for reconsideration and appealed to this board.
The examining attorney argues that “‘Tournament of
Champions’ clearly indicates a series of games and/or
contests that constitute a single unit of competition or
‘tournaments’ … Equally apparent is the fact that ‘ALASKA
STATE’ merely describes the location of the services, which
is the state of Alaska, a statement also reflected in
applicant’s specimens and business address … In short, the
wording ALASKA STATE POKER CHAMPIONSHIP merely informs the
consumer that the services constitute a state poker
championship, a connection patently obvious on the specimen
of record.” Brief at unnumbered pp. 7-9.

1 The current examining attorney was not the original examining
attorney of this application.
Ser. No. 78857617
3
In response, applicant argues (Reply Brief at 4) that:
The mark is a composite mark (TMEP 1213.02) and should
be examined in its entirety (Section 2(e)(4), TMEP
1213.06(a)).

It is not generic, as shown by the examining
attorney’s own evidence or lack thereof (TMEP
1213.03(b)).

The mark:
FUR RENDEZVOUS TEXAS HOLD’EM TOURNAMENT OF CHAMPIONS
ALASKA STATE POKER CHAMPIONSHIP
is unitary and creates a commercial impression (TMEP
1213.05).

The mark is like a slogan and should not be broken up
for the purposes of disclaimer (TMEP 1213.05).

Preliminary Issue
Applicant filed a notice of appeal and a request for
reconsideration. On December 14, 2007, the board remanded
the application to the examining attorney to consider the
request for reconsideration. On January 14, 2008, the
examining attorney denied the request for reconsideration
and submitted additional definitions of “the terms
‘Alaska,’ ‘state,’ ‘poker,’ and ‘championship’” as well as
evidence showing “use of the phrase ‘Tournament of
Champions’ to describe such a contest in different
contexts.” Applicant now argues that “the examining
attorney’s evidence presented after appeal should be
disregarded since it is both untimely and irrelevant, and
does not tend to prove or disprove the examining attorney’s
Ser. No. 78857617
4
theories and conclusions.” Brief at 3. The examining
attorney points out the TBMP § 1207.04 states: “When a
timely request for reconsideration of an appealed action is
filed (with or without new evidence), the examining
attorney may submit, with his or her response to the
request, new evidence directed to the issue(s) for which
reconsideration is sought.” See also In re Giger, 78 USPQ2d
1405, 1407 (TTAB 2006) (“Inasmuch as applicants sought
reconsideration after the examining attorney’s final
refusal, the examining attorney was permitted to submit
evidence in response to this request and applicants’
request that we not consider such evidence is denied”).
Therefore, the evidence was not untimely submitted.
Furthermore, because it is not irrelevant or otherwise
excludable, we deny applicant’s request that the examining
attorney’s evidence submitted with her denial of the
request for reconsideration be disregarded.
Mere Descriptiveness
“A term is merely descriptive if it immediately
conveys knowledge of a quality, feature, function, or
characteristic of the goods or services with which it is
used.” In re Bayer Aktiengesellschaft, 488 F.3d 960, 82
USPQ2d 1828, 1831 (Fed. Cir. 2007). “A mark may be merely
descriptive even if it does not describe the full scope and
Ser. No. 78857617
5
extent of the applicant’s goods or services.” In re
Oppedahl & Larson LLP, 373 F.3d 1171, 71 USPQ2d 1370, 1371
(Fed. Cir. 2004). To be merely descriptive, a term need
only describe a single significant quality or property of
the goods or services. In re Gyulay, 820 F.2d 1216, 3
USPQ2d 1009, 1009 (Fed. Cir. 1987). It is important to
remember that we must look at the mark in relation to the
goods or services, and not in the abstract, when we
consider whether it is merely descriptive. In re Abcor
Development Corp., 588 F.2d 811, 200 USPQ 215, 218 (CCPA
1978). During examination, the Office “‘may require the
applicant to disclaim an unregisterable component of a mark
otherwise registrable.’ 15 U.S.C. §1056(a) (1994). Thus,
the examiner’s disclaimer requirement is proper if the
[applicant’s phrase] is merely descriptive and thus not
registerable.” In re Nett Designs Inc., 236 F.3d 1339, 57
USPQ2d 1564, 1565-66 (Fed. Cir. 2001).
In this case, the examining attorney has required the
disclaimer of the terms “Texas Hold’em Tournament Of
Champions Alaska State Poker Championship” in applicant’s
FUR RENDEZVOUS TEXAS HOLD’EM TOURNAMENT OF CHAMPIONS ALASKA
STATE POKER CHAMPIONSHIP mark. Applicant has in fact
Ser. No. 78857617
6
entered a disclaimer of the term “Texas Hold’em.”2
Therefore, the question on appeal is whether the examining
attorney’s requirement for a disclaimer of the terms
“Tournament of Champions” and “Alaska State Poker
Championship” is proper.
The examining attorney submitted several registrations
that are either registered on the Supplemental Register or
with a disclaimer of the term “Poker Championship.” See
Final Office Action, Registration Nos. 3226126 (CEO POKER
CHAMPIONSHIP for entertainment in the nature of poker
games, Supplemental Register, “Poker Championship”
disclaimed); 3226140 (INTERCONTINENTAL POKER CHAMPIONSHIP
for entertainment in the nature of televised and online
poker tournaments, Supplemental Register, “Poker
Championship” disclaimed); and 3227526 (MIDWEST REGIONAL
POKER CHAMPIONSHIPS A WORLD SERIES OF POKER SATELLITE
EVENT for organizing, conducting, and exhibiting poker
events, “Midwest Regional Poker Championship” and “Poker
Satellite Event” disclaimed).

2 Texas Hold’em “is a poker game in which each player gets two
pocket cards, while five community cards are dealt face-up on the
table. The strength of a player’s hand is the best hand that can
be made with these seven cards.” See First Office Action,
www.seriouspoker.com.
Ser. No. 78857617
7
With her denial of the request for reconsideration,
the examining attorney also submitted dictionary
definitions and a gazetteer entry:
Alaska – “Alaska is the largest state in the Union,
but ranks 48th in population.”
Columbia Gazetteer of the World Online (2005). See
also State of Alaska website.

Championship – a contest held to determine a champion.

Poker – any of several card games in which a player
bets that the value of his or her hand is greater than
that of the hands held by others, in which each
subsequent player must either equal or raise the bet
or drop out, and in which the player holding the
highest hand at the end of the betting wins the pot.

State – one of the constituent units of a nation
having a federal government
- the territory of a state
Merriam-Webster Online

The examining attorney also included internet evidence
of the use of the term “Tournament of Champions.”
Tournament of Champions has announced with regret that
the Tournament of Champions of Poker has ended.

The TOC was one of the most prestigious events in the
poker world. Its uniqueness and prestige were tied
together; unlike all the other major poker
tournaments, player[s] who wish to enter the TOC
cannot simply plunk down an entry fee. The[y] must be
proven champions, players who have either won an event
in the previous year, won a WSOP [World Series of
Poker] bracelet, or finished in the money in the prior
year’s TOC [Tournament of Champions].
www.pokerpages.com

Ohio Tournament Of Champions
America’s Only National Modified Wrestling
Championships
www.ohiotofc.com
Ser. No. 78857617
8

Kentucky Intercollegiate Debate Program
Tournament of Champions (TOC) May, 2008
Now in its 37th year, the Tournament of Champions
serves as the forum for the nation’s very best
Lincoln-Douglas, Policy, Public Forum and Student
Congress debaters.
www.uky.edu

Reno Tournament of Champions
The Toughest Tournament in the USA
The Reno Tournament of Champions strives to provide
the very best competition the wrestling world has to
offer from the college and high school levels.
www.rtoc.net

World Series of Poker:
Tournament of Champions – 2007 edition
Players test their skills at the premier Circuit
Events in hopes of qualifying for the winner-take-all,
invitation-only Tournament of Champions at the Rio
Resort in Las Vegas.
www.cduniverse.com

The examining attorney also points to applicant’s
specimen and argues that the “phrase ‘Tournament of
Champions’ clearly indicates a series of games and/or
contests that constitute a single unit of competition or
‘tournaments’ … Equally apparent is the fact that ‘ALASKA
STATE’ merely describes the location of the services,
which is the state of Alaska … [and that] ALASKA STATE
POKER CHAMPIONSHIP merely informs the consumer that the
services constitute a state poker championship.” Brief at
7 and 9. Applicant’s specimen is set out below:

Ser. No. 78857617
9

The information on the specimen makes it clear that
applicant’s event occurs in Alaska, see, e.g., “Are you
the best Texas Hold’em player Alaska has to offer?” and
“Officially sanctioned locations” include The Hideout
Lounge in Fairbanks3 and, at the bottom of the specimen,
there is a reference to the Alaska Poker Association.
Inasmuch as there are “Poker Championships,” that
applicant’s services include “championship competitions
for playing poker games,” and that these events occur in
the State of Alaska, it is clear that the term “Alaska

3 “Alaska … Anchorage is the largest city … Fairbanks is the
second largest.” Columbia Gazetteer of the World Online. The
address of applicant, Greater Anchorage, Inc., is in Anchorage,
Alaska.
Ser. No. 78857617
10
State Poker Championship” is at least merely descriptive
for a poker championship held in the State of Alaska.
Next, we look at the term “Tournament of Champions.”
Applicant’s specimen invites people to “Qualify for the
Tournament of Champions at Official Sanctioned Locations
January 2 – February 26th.” The internet evidence refers
to a “Tournament of Champions of Poker.” According to
that website, “Tournament of Champions” required that
participants “be proven champions, players who have either
won an event in the previous year, won a WSOP bracelet, or
finished in the money in the prior year’s TOC.” There is
also a poker video game about the World Series of Poker:
Tournament of Champions. It refers to the winner-take-all
Tournament of Champions in Las Vegas. The evidence also
includes other examples of “Tournament of Champions”
competitions in wrestling and college debating. A
tournament is “a trial of skill in some game, in which
competitors play a series of contestants, a chess
tournament.”4 There are also poker tournaments that
include champions from other poker championships.
Therefore, we find that the term “Tournament of Champions”

4 The Random House Dictionary of the English Language
(unabridged) (2d ed. 1987). We take judicial notice of this
definition. University of Notre Dame du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food
Imports Co., 213 USPQ 594, 596 (TTAB 1982), aff’d, 703 F.2d 1372,
217 USPQ 505 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Ser. No. 78857617
11
is merely descriptive of a poker tournament where skilled
players including prior “champions” participate.
While we have found that the terms “Tournament of
Champions” and “Alaska State Poker Championship” are
merely descriptive, applicant argues that the mark is
unitary because the “words of the mark are connected in
the specimen by design features and relative location of
the words.” Brief at 6. However, a review of the
specimen does not lead to the conclusion that the mark is
unitary. First, we note that applicant has presented its
mark as a standard character drawing so that the words in
the mark do not have to be displayed as the mark is
presently included on the specimen.5 Second, it is not
clear what design connects the words on the specimen. The
words are displayed in yellow block letters with no design
near the words except perhaps the logos of two beer
sponsors (Coors and Molson) that are above the mark.
Third, the words are not even displayed in the same type.
The words are displayed in yellow block letters as
follows:
FUR RENDEZVOUS TEXAS HOLD’EM
TOURNAMENT OF CHAMPIONS
Alaska State Poker Championship
March 4th, 2006 Egan Center – 5:00 pm

5 We note that applicant has disclaimed the term “Texas Hold’em,”
which appears on the first line with the term “Fur Rendezvous.”
Ser. No. 78857617
12
The first two lines are in uppercase letters while
the third line is in title case. It is also followed by
the date and location of the event also in title case and
a somewhat duller shade of yellow.
“A mark or portion of a mark is considered ‘unitary’
when it creates a commercial impression separate and apart
from any unregistrable component. That is, the elements
are so merged together that they cannot be divided to be
regarded as separable elements.” TMEP § 1213.05 (5th ed.
rev. September 2007). “A disclaimer of a descriptive
portion of a composite mark is unnecessary only where the
form or degree of integration of that element in the
composite makes it obvious that no claim other than of the
composite would be involved. That is, if the elements are
so merged together that they cannot be regarded as
separable elements, the mark is a single unitary mark and
not a composite mark and no disclaimer is necessary.” In
re EBS Data Processing, Inc., 212 USPQ 964, 966 (TTAB
1981). A mark is not unitary merely because there is some
common feature found in the words in the mark. In re Lean
Line, Inc., 229 USPQ 781, 782 (TTAB 1986) (“[T]here is
nothing in the record to suggest that the mere fact that
both words [LEAN LINE] which form the mark begin with the
letter ‘L’ would cause purchasers to miss the merely
Ser. No. 78857617
13
descriptive significance of the term ‘LEAN’ or consider the
entire mark to be a unitary expression”) and In re IBP,
Inc., 228 USPQ 303, 303 (TTAB 1985) (Disclaimer of the term
SELECT TRIM affirmed. “That because of the common letter
‘T’ the two terms tend to run together linguistically is
irrelevant”). Here, the only common feature is a simple
yellow color, which is itself somewhat similar to the color
of the date and location information. We have no evidence
that purchasers would see this simple feature as making
applicant’s terms into a unitary term. Furthermore,
applicant’s mark FUR RENDEZVOUS TEXAS HOLD’EM TOURNAMENT OF
CHAMPIONS ALASKA STATE POKER CHAMPIONSHIP “is not an
expression, like ‘LIGHT ‘N LIVELY’ [In re Kraft, Inc., 218
USPQ 571 (TTAB 1983)] or ‘SUGAR & SPICE’ [held not merely
descriptive of bakery products in In re Colonial Stores
Inc., 394 F.2d 549, 157 USPQ 382 (CCPA 1968)], which has
any known use or application apart from the goods in
question.” Lean Line, 229 USPQ at 782 (citation to Kraft
added]. Therefore, because applicant’s mark is not
unitary, a disclaimer is required.
Applicant also argues that its mark is a slogan. A
slogan is a type of unitary expression that “should not be
broken up for purposes of requiring a disclaimer.” TMEP
§ 1213.05(b). It is not apparent how applicant’s mark is a
Ser. No. 78857617
14
slogan. As a mark in a standard form drawing, the mark FUR
RENDEZVOUS TEXAS HOLD’EM TOURNAMENT OF CHAMPIONS ALASKA
STATE POKER CHAMPIONSHIP, rather than looking like a
slogan, instead appears to have a somewhat incoherent
quality to it. As used on the specimen, the mark appears
to convey three separate pieces of information.
1. FUR RENDEZVOUS TEXAS HOLD’EM
2. TOURNAMENT OF CHAMPIONS
3. Alaska State Poker Championship

Since it is not clear how applicant’s mark would be
perceived as a slogan, there is no basis to find that
applicant’s mark is unitary.
We conclude that the examining attorney has met her
burden of showing that the terms “Tournament of Champions”
and “Alaska State Poker Championship” in applicant’s mark
are merely descriptive, which applicant has not rebutted.
Also, applicant’s mark is not unitary so a disclaimer of
those terms is appropriate.
Decision: The examining attorney’s refusal to
register applicant’s mark without a disclaimer of the
merely descriptive terms “Tournament of Champions” and
“Alaska State Poker Championship” is affirmed. If
applicant submits an appropriate disclaimer of the terms
“Tournament of Champions” and “Alaska State Poker
Championship” within thirty days of the mailing date of
Ser. No. 78857617
15
this decision, the refusal to register will be set aside
and the mark will be forwarded for publication for
opposition.6

6 The standardized printing format for the required disclaimer
text is as follows: “No claim is made to the exclusive right to
use TEXAS HOLD’EM TOURNAMENT OF CHAMPIONS ALASKA STATE POKER
CHAMPIONSHIP apart from the mark as shown.” TMEP
§ 1213.08(a)(i).