1210.06(b) Marks That Include Primarily Geographically Deceptively Misdescriptive and Deceptive Terms Combined With Additional Matter
If a composite mark includes matter that is primarily geographically deceptively misdescriptive within the meaning of §2(e)(3) or deceptive under §2(a), and the mark as a whole would be likely to be perceived as indicating the geographic origin of the goods or services, the examining attorney must follow the procedures outlined above for refusing registration. See TMEP §1210.05(d).
Geographically deceptive and primarily geographically deceptively misdescriptive matter need not comprise the entire mark, or even the dominant portion of the mark. See Trademark Act §2(a) and (e)(3); 15 U.S.C. §1052(a) and (e)(3). A refusal under §2(a) or §2(e)(3) is appropriate if some portion of the applied-for mark is geographically deceptive or primarily geographically deceptively misdescriptive with respect to the goods and/or services in question. See e.g., Am. Speech-Language-Hearing Ass’n v. Nat’l Hearing Aid Soc’y, 224 USPQ 798, 808 (TTAB 1984).
A composite mark that is deceptive under §2(a) cannot be registered, even with a disclaimer of the geographic component. In re Perry Mfg. Co., 12 USPQ2d 1751, 1751-52 (TTAB 1989). Similarly, a disclaimer of the geographic matter will not overcome a §2(e)(3) refusal, even if the mark was in use prior to December 8, 1993. In re Wada, 194 F.3d 1297, 52 USPQ2d 1539,1542 (Fed. Cir. 1999).
To help ensure that determinations concerning the primary significance of composite marks are handled consistently, examining attorneys must consult their senior or managing attorney before going forward when they have made a preliminary determination that the primary significance of the mark as a whole is not geographic. The senior or managing attorney will make the final determination or may seek guidance from the Office of Legal Policy regarding such marks.