It has been said that one can predict the outcome of a Section 2(d) appeal 95% of the time just by looking at the marks and the goods or services. Presented for your consideration are three recent TTAB decisions in Section 2(d) appeals. One refusal was reversed. Which one? [Answer in first comment].

In re David Copeland-Smith, Serial No. 85498107 ((March 9, 2018) (Opinion by Judge Albert Zervas) [not precedential]. [Oral argument in this appeal was heard at Tulane Law School on February 28, 2018. Section 2(d) refusal of BEAST MODE SOCCER for “T-shirts” and “Sporting goods and equipment for soccer training, namely, balls” [SOCCER disclaimed], in view of the registered mark BEAST MODE, owned by former NFL player Marshawn Lynch, for “t-shirts” and “Men’s, women’s and children’s clothing, namely, shirts, sweatshirts; headwear, namely, hats, caps”].

In re Raphael Dal Bo AG, Serial No, 79204613 (March 9, 2018) (Opinion by Judge Lorelei Ritchie) [not precedential] [Section 2(d) refusal of the mark RAPHAEL DAL BO LA VITA È BELLA for “alcoholic beverages except beers,” in view of the registered mark VITABELLA for “Alcoholic beverages containing fruit; aperitifs, liqueurs; pre-mixed alcoholic beverages, other than beer-based; spirits; wine; red wines; rose wines; sparkling wines; white wines”].

In re Biowish Technologies International Inc., Serial No. 86739178 (March 7, 2018) (Opinion by Judge Michael B. Adlin]. [not precedential] [Section 2(d) refusal of the mark BIOWISH GARD’N FRESH for “fruit and vegetable wash,” in view of the registered mark GARDEN FRESH for “cleaning preparations for household purposes”].