Innovative Marble & Tile Inc.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Apr 19, 2001

No. 75460970re (T.T.A.B. Apr. 19, 2001)

Serial No. 75/460,970
4/19/01
Paper No. 16
JQ
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________
In re Innovative Marble & Tile Inc.
________
Serial No. 75/460,970
_______
Request for Reconsideration
_______
Myron Amer for applicant.
Stacey Johnson, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office
113 (Meryl Hershkowitz, Managing Attorney).
_______
Before Quinn, Hairston and Bottorff, Administrative
Trademark Judges.
Opinion by Quinn, Administrative Trademark Judge:
The Board, on March 7, 2001, affirmed the refusal to
register on the ground that the specimens do not show use
of the mark in connection with the services recited in the
application.
Applicant now seeks reconsideration of this decision.
The first item raised by applicant concerns the
recitation of services. The recitation referred to in the
THIS DISPOSITION IS NOT
CITABLE AS PRECEDENT OF
THE TTAB
Serial No. 75/460,970
Board’s decision is taken exactly as it appears in the
amendment filed by applicant on August 16, 1999. That is
the reason why a “[sic]” was used when the Board referred
to the recitation. It now appears that the term “nature”
should be substituted for “name” so that the recitation
reads as follows: “providing product information services
for others in the nature of printed materials concerning
the source of ceramic and porcelain tile, marble, granite,
limestone and agglomerates.” The recitation has been
changed accordingly.
This recitation of services in International Class 35
must control in considering the acceptability of the
specimens for registration in that class. In its request
for reconsideration, applicant recognizes that some of the
specimens show, as pointed out by the Board in the original
opinion, promotion of products sold by applicant itself.
Applicant goes on, however, to focus its attention on one
of the other specimens:
The specimen of record which supports
the International Class 35 selection is
NOT the ClipperMagazine advertisement
noted at decision page 5, line 1. This
advertisement was used in lieu of a
photograph showing the display of IMT
ITALIA as a showroom sign, and it is
the sign which is the supporting
specimen and the reference adjacent the
sign to “Buy direct from importer.”
Serial No. 75/460,970
In considering this specimen in the original opinion,
the Board characterized it as follows:
The advertisement is for applicant’s
“warehouse showroom” which, the
advertisement indicates, is “now open
to the public...now buy below retail
and save.” Although this advertisement
indicates “buy direct from importer”
and shows the mark used in connection
with applicant’s sale of imported
marble, porcelain granite and ceramic,
there is no reference whatsoever to the
services of providing information for
others about these products.
We stand by our assessment that this specimen, even if
used as a showroom sign, does not support registration of
the applied-for mark in connection with the particular
services recited in the application.
The request for reconsideration is denied, and the
Board’s decision dated March 7, 2001 stands.