Strategic Weather Services, L.P.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Sep 20, 2000

No. 75196905 (T.T.A.B. Sep. 20, 2000)

Hearing Date: Paper No. 19
June 15, 2000 RLS/EM
9/20/00
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________
In re Strategic Weather Services, L.P.
________
Serial Nos. 75/196,406 & 75/196,905
_______
Rachel L. Brendzel of Blank Rome Comisky & McCauley LLP for
Strategic Weather Services, L.P.
Paula Mays, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 114
(Margaret Le, Managing Attorney).
_______
Before Simms, Quinn and Rogers, Administrative Trademark
Judges.
Opinion by Simms, Administrative Trademark Judge:
Strategic Weather Services, L.P. (applicant), a
Pennsylvania limited partnership, has appealed from the
final refusals of the Trademark Examining Attorney to
register the marks THE GLOBAL WEATHER NETWORK and THE BEST
WEATHER FORECAST ON EARTH for the following services:
providing short and long range weather
information services particularly for event
planning provided via a global computer network,
television, cable, fax and telephone and computer
THIS DISPOSITION
IS NOT CITABLE AS PRECEDENT
OF THE T.T.A.B.
Ser. No. 75/196,406 & 75/196,905
2
services, namely, providing access to an
interactive Web site in the weather field.1
The Examining Attorney has refused registration in each
case under Section 2(e)(1) of the Act, 15 USC §1052(e)(1),
arguing that applicant’s marks are merely descriptive of
applicant’s services. Applicant and the Examining Attorney
have submitted briefs and an oral hearing was held.
We affirm the refusals in both cases.
Serial No. 75/196,905-–THE GLOBAL WEATHER NETWORK
The Examining Attorney argues that applicant’s
asserted mark merely describes the subject matter,
characteristic or feature of applicant’s services of
providing weather information from around the world, or
providing weather information to a global audience, by
means of computer or other communications networks. The
Examining Attorney has relied upon dictionary definitions
of the words comprising applicant’s mark, including
definitions of the word “global” as meaning “Of, pertaining
to, or involving the entire earth: WORLDWIDE” and of the
word “network” as meaning “A chain of interconnected
broadcasting stations, usu. sharing a large proportion of
their programs .” Webster’s II New Riverside

1 Application Serial Nos. 75/196,905 and 75/196,406, both filed
November 12, 1996, based upon applicant’s allegations of a bona
fide intention to use the marks in commerce.
Ser. No. 75/196,406 & 75/196,905
3
University Dictionary (1994 edition). The Examining
Attorney argues that, whether applicant’s mark is
interpreted as providing weather information by means of a
communications network accessible on a global basis, or as
indicating that applicant’s weather information services
concern weather conditions from around the world, either
meaning is merely descriptive of applicant’s services. The
Examining Attorney contends that no thought, imagination or
perception is required to determine the nature of
applicant’s services. Rather, the Examining Attorney
argues that the significance of applicant’s mark is readily
apparent because the mark clearly indicates that applicant
provides either global weather information by means of a
communications network or that applicant provides weather
information by means of a communications network accessible
on a global basis. Such an asserted mark, according to the
Examining Attorney, is not a source identifier.
The Examining Attorney has submitted articles from the
Nexis computer search system. However, because almost all
of these articles are from foreign publications or from
newswire services, we have given very little weight to this
Ser. No. 75/196,406 & 75/196,905
4
evidence. See In re Urbano, 51 USPQ2d 1776, 1778 fn. 3
(TTAB 1999).2
Applicant, a private weather company specializing in
long-range weather forecasting, contends that, while an
argument may be made that the components of its mark are
merely descriptive, the mark as a whole is not. Rather,
applicant contends that the entire phrase is “unique and
arbitrary” (Response, filed August 27, 1998, p.5) or that
it is a suggestive phrase because imagination, thought and
perception is required in order to determine the nature of
applicant’s services. According to applicant, consumers do
not immediately know the nature of applicant’s services.
Applicant contends that mental pause is necessary in order
to understand the nature of applicant’s services. Among
other reasons for this contention is applicant’s argument
that its asserted mark is subject to several
interpretations—-i.e., that applicant is an organization of
meteorological offices from around the world, or that
applicant operates a network of worldwide broadcast

2 We note that in the second Office action, the Examining
Attorney issued a requirement for a disclaimer of the word
“NETWORK” apart from the mark as shown. This requirement was
reiterated in the final refusal but was not repeated in the
Examining Attorney’s denial of applicant’s request for
reconsideration. Nor was the requirement for a disclaimer
mentioned in the Examining Attorney’s appeal brief, other than in
summarizing the factual history of this case. See TMEP §§1106.09
Ser. No. 75/196,406 & 75/196,905
5
stations, or that applicant’s weather information services
are accessed globally. Applicant contends that “[its]
service is a ‘network’ only in a fanciful, broad sense that
it is available thought [sic] the Internet, which is
sometimes likened to a ‘network’.” Response, filed August
27, 1998, p.6. Applicant asserts that it does not own a
network of television stations. Finally, applicant argues
that there is no evidence of third-party use of its mark
and that registration to applicant will not impair
competitors. Any doubt concerning mere descriptiveness
should be resolved, according to applicant, in its favor.
Upon careful consideration of this record and the
arguments of the attorneys, we agree with the Examining
Attorney that applicant’s asserted mark THE GLOBAL WEATHER
NETWORK is merely descriptive of applicant’s weather
information services. Of course, the Board may look at the
individual components of an asserted mark and discuss their
descriptive connotations in the context of determining the
mere descriptiveness of an entire phrase. See In re Hester
Industries, Inc., 230 USPQ 797 (TTAB 1996). We believe
that the public, upon seeing applicant's asserted mark, and
considering it in its entirety in connection with

and 1501.02. Accordingly, we agree with applicant that this
requirement must be considered to have been withdrawn.
Ser. No. 75/196,406 & 75/196,905
6
applicant's services, is immediately apprised of the nature
of applicant's services. The services are available around
the world (i.e., globally) because they are provided via an
interactive Web site,3 and the Web site features a "network"
or linked collection of sources of weather information. No
imagination or thought is necessary to determine the nature
of applicant's services.
Serial No. 75/196,406--THE BEST WEATHER FORECAST ON EARTH
It is the Examining Attorney’s position that this
asserted mark is a phrase which merely describes, in a
laudatory sense, a feature or characteristic of applicant’s
weather information services. Because the asserted mark
attributes only quality or excellence to applicant’s
services, it does not function as a source identifier,

3 We take judicial notice of the following dictionary definition,
which illustrates that "Web," in the context in which it is used
by applicant in its identification of services, is a shorthand
reference for the "World Wide Web."
Web See World Wide Web.
The Computer Glossary The Complete Illustrated Dictionary 462 (8th
ed. 1998)
World Wide Web The largest collection of online
information in the World. The Web is an Internet facility that
has become synonymous with the Interent [sic]. Its foundation is
the HTML document, which contains links (URLs) to other documents
on the same Web server or on servers anywhere in the world. The
Web uses the HTTP protocol to download Web pages to a browser….
…[T]he Web is turning into "the" worldwide information system
for education, research, entertainment and commerce.
The Computer Glossary The Complete Illustrated Dictionary 470 (8th
ed. 1998)
Ser. No. 75/196,406 & 75/196,905
7
according to the Examining Attorney. No imagination or
thought is needed in order to discern the nature of
applicant’s services. Rather, the Examining Attorney
argues, the asserted mark indicates nothing but the
superior quality of applicant’s services.
The Examining Attorney has relied upon dictionary
definitions and articles from the Nexis computer database
showing some use of the phrase “best weather forecast(s).”
To the extent that these articles appeared in foreign
publications, they have been discounted. See Urbano,
supra.
Applicant, on the other hand, argues that the asserted
mark is a “unique and unitary phrase” (Request for
Reconsideration, filed August 27, 1998, p.3, and
applicant’s appeal brief, p.13) and that it is suggestive
because imagination, thought and perception is required in
order to determine the nature of applicant’s services.
Applicant argues that its asserted mark is not in the
dictionary and that it is not in common parlance for
weather informational services. According to applicant, no
third parties are using this expression and competitors are
not inhibited by applicant’s use or registration.
Applicant also argues that the standard for evaluating the
registrability of slogans is “slightly different” from that
Ser. No. 75/196,406 & 75/196,905
8
for evaluating conventional trademarks if the slogan is
displayed separate and apart from other matter. Applicant
concludes that the asserted mark is not merely descriptive
of applicant’s services of providing specialized, long-
range weather reports for use in specific industries.
We have carefully considered applicant’s arguments but
believe that the asserted mark is merely descriptive of
applicant’s services in a laudatory way. First, applicant
has cited no specific authority indicating that slogans
should be evaluated differently from other trademarks. The
cases that applicant cited, such as In re Hallicrafters
Company, 153 USPQ 376 (TTAB 1967) (QUALITY THROUGH
CRAFTSMANSHIP held to function as a trademark) and In re
Sottile, 156 USPQ 655 (TTAB 1968) (YOUR FINANCIAL SECURITY
IS OUR BUSINESS held suggestive and not merely descriptive)
are distinguishable from the asserted mark.
Marks which are merely laudatory and descriptive of
the merit of a product or service are regarded as being
merely descriptive. 2 J. Thomas McCarthy, McCarthy on
Trademarks and Unfair Competition §11:17 (4th ed. 1996).
Here, the phrase THE BEST WEATHER FORECAST ON EARTH is
highly descriptive of a feature of applicant’s services.
What the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently
stated in In re Boston Beer Co. LP, 53 USPQ2d 1056 (1999),
Ser. No. 75/196,406 & 75/196,905
9
involving the asserted mark THE BEST BEER IN AMERICA, is
equally applicable to this case:
As in this case, a phrase or slogan can be so
highly laudatory and descriptive as to be
incapable of acquiring distinctiveness as a
trademark. The proposed mark is a common,
laudatory advertising phrase which is merely
descriptive of Boston Beer’s goods. Indeed, it
so highly laudatory and descriptive of the
qualities of its product that the slogan does not
and could not function as a trademark to
distinguish Boston Beer’s goods and serve as an
indication of origin.
See also In re Wilewood, Inc., 201 USPQ 400 (TTAB 1978)
(AMERICA’S BEST POPCORN! and AMERICA’S FAVORITE POPCORN!)
Decision: The refusal to register in both cases is
affirmed.
R. L. Simms
T. J. Quinn
G. F. Rogers
Administrative Trademark
Judges, Trademark Trial
and Appeal Board