Naturopath-ic National Council, Inc.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

May 5, 2008

No. 78851026re (T.T.A.B. May. 5, 2008)

Mailed: May 5, 2008
PTH

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________

In re Naturopathic National Council, Inc.
________

Serial No. 78851026
_______

Request for Reconsideration
_______

Howard M. Cohn, Esq. for Naturopathic National Council,
Inc.

Dominic Fathy, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 108
(Andrew Lawrence, Managing Attorney).
_______

Before Hairston, Holtzman and Zervas, Administrative
Trademark Judges.

Opinion by Hairston, Administrative Trademark Judge:

Applicant has filed a request for reconsideration of
the Board’s February 27, 2008 decision affirming the
examining attorney’s refusal to register applicant’s
certification mark DOCTOR OF NATUROPATHIC MEDICINE on the
ground that it is generic for applicant’s identified
services.
In the request for reconsideration, applicant
essentially asks the Board to reweigh the evidence, and
THIS OPINION IS NOT
A PRECEDENT OF THE
TTAB
Ser No. 78851026
2
argues that the Nexis materials submitted by the examining
attorney should not have been given weight in reaching our
decision. Attached to applicant’s request for
reconsideration is Exhibit A which consists of
correspondence from an official at the Florida Department
of State. Also, applicant seeks an oral hearing on its
request for reconsideration.
Insofar as applicant seeks an oral hearing on its
request for reconsideration, it is the practice of the
Board to deny such a request unless an oral hearing is
necessary to clarify the issue(s) to be decided. Trademark
Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure (TBMP) §502.03
(2d ed. rev. 2004). In this case, an oral hearing is
not necessary to decide applicant’s request for
reconsideration. Further, Trademark Rule 2.142(d) provides
that the record in an application should be complete prior
to the filing of an appeal, and additional evidence filed
after appeal normally will be given no consideration by the
Board. Under the circumstances, we have given no
consideration to Exhibit A attached to the request for
reconsideration.
The purpose of reconsideration is to point out errors
made by the Board in making its decision, not to merely
reargue the case or ask the Board to reweigh the evidence
Ser No. 78851026
3
as applicant has done. The basis for the Board’s decision
is clearly articulated therein and we do not find any error
in reaching that decision.
In view of the foregoing, applicant’s request for
reconsideration is denied.