Atmel Corp.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 8, 2002

No. 75649068 (T.T.A.B. Mar. 8, 2002)

3/8/02

Paper No. 15
JQ

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________

In re Atmel Corporation
________

Serial No. 75/649,068
_______

Thomas Schneck of Law Offices of Thomas Schneck for
applicant.

Florentina Blandu, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office
112 (Janice O’Lear, Managing Attorney).
_______

Before Quinn, Walters and Chapman, Administrative Trademark
Judges.

Opinion by Quinn, Administrative Trademark Judge:
An application has been filed to register the mark
SMARTRF for “semiconductor devices, computer programs to
develop software applications using semiconductor devices,
and software for evaluating semiconductor devices.”1
The Trademark Examining Attorney has refused
registration under Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act on

1 Application Serial No. 75/649,068, filed February 26, 1999,
based on an allegation of a bona fide intention to use the mark
in commerce.
THIS DISPOSITION
IS NOT CITABLE AS PRECEDENT
OF THE T.T.A.B.
Ser No. 75/649,068
2
the ground that applicant’s mark, when applied to
applicant’s identified goods, is merely descriptive
thereof.
When the refusal was made final, applicant appealed.
Applicant and the Examining Attorney filed briefs.
Applicant originally requested an oral hearing, but
subsequently withdrew the request.
Applicant argues that the applied-for mark, when
considered in its entirety, is incongruous in that while
“smart” can mean “bright, sharp or intelligent,” a radio
frequency (applicant concedes that “RF” is an abbreviation
for “radio frequency”) cannot be described in such a
manner. Further, while the term “smart” can describe
certain programs, machinery or hardware, a radio frequency
is none of these things. Applicant also contends that the
term “smart” has a variety of meanings and is, therefore,
ambiguous. In urging that the refusal be reversed,
applicant submitted dictionary definitions of “smart,”
“radio frequency” and “semiconductor device,” and a copy of
one third-party registration.
The Examining Attorney maintains that applicant’s mark
describes radio frequency semiconductors and computer
programs incorporating smart technology. As opposed to
being an ambiguous term, the Examining Attorney asserts
Ser No. 75/649,068
3
that “smart” has a commonly understood meaning as applied
to semiconductors and computer programs. In support of the
refusal, the Examining Attorney submitted dictionary
definitions of “RF” and “smart,” excerpts of applicant’s
Internet web page and articles retrieved from the NEXIS
database, and third-party “SMART” registrations showing a
disclaimer or registration on the Supplemental Register.
It is well settled that a term is considered to be
merely descriptive of goods, within the meaning of Section
2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act, if it immediately describes
an ingredient, quality, characteristic or feature thereof
or if it directly conveys information regarding the nature,
function, purpose, use or intended use of the goods. In re
Abcor Development Corp., 588 F.2d 811, 200 USPQ 215, 217-18
(CCPA 1978). It is not necessary that a term describe all
of the properties or functions of the goods in order for it
to be considered to be merely descriptive thereof; rather,
it is sufficient if the term describes a significant
attribute or feature about them. Moreover, whether a term
is merely descriptive is determined not in the abstract but
in relation to the goods for which registration is sought.
In re Bright-Crest, Ltd., 204 USPQ 591, 593 (TTAB 1979).
The letters “RF” comprise an abbreviation of the term
“radio frequency,” and applicant conceded this point during
Ser No. 75/649,068
4
the prosecution of the application. A review of
applicant’s Internet web page indicates that applicant
designs, manufactures and markets “RF semiconductors” and
advanced semiconductors, including “RF integrated
circuits.”
The term “smart” has a variety of meanings, but we
must consider the meaning of the term as applied to
applicant’s goods, in this case semiconductor devices and
computer programs. The term “smart” is defined as
“[d]esignating a program that performs correctly in a wide
variety of complicated circumstances without having to be
explicitly instructed by the user.” Dictionary of Computer
Words (1995). We take judicial notice of another
definition of “smart:” “Equipped with, using, or
containing electronic control devices,
as,...microprocessors.” Random House Webster’s Unabridged
Dictionary (2nd ed. 1998).
The record shows a variety of uses of “smart” in
connection with electronic devices, including the
following: (1) “[g]iven the integration of on-chip biasing
and temperature compensation, these smart RF silicon
transistors eliminate much detailed circuit design”
(Microwave Journal, June 1, 1999); (2) “[h]aving focused on
the development and sales of contactless smart card
Ser No. 75/649,068
5
products and services since its inception in 1991, Racom is
now re-focusing its business to become a leading supplier
of ‘Smart RF’ technologies to the semiconductor
marketplace” (Business Wire, January 6, 1999); (3)
“advanced radio frequency and smart-card microprocessor
technology” (Wireless Today, March 13, 2000); (4) “smart
cards soon will be available for use with contactless chip
cards that communicate with terminals via radio frequency”
(Card Fax, April 12, 2000); (5) “a manufacturer of wireless
smart cards and other ultraminiature radio frequency (RF)
applications” (Electronic News, March 6, 2000); and (6)
“[t]he USPS will use radio frequency identification smart
labels to sort your mail” (ADC News and Solutions, February
29, 2000).2
Based on the evidence of record, we find that the term
SMARTRF immediately describes, without conjecture or
speculation, a significant feature of applicant’s
semiconductor devices, namely that the radio frequency
semiconductor devices incorporate or involve smart
technology. Likewise, applicant’s computer programs deal

2 Two of the other NEXIS articles bear headlines of “Alliance
promotes smart RF-ID card” and “Security settles on smart RF.”
Although these articles appeared in electronic publications, the
texts of the articles are missing from the NEXIS printouts. We
are unable, therefore, to adequately assess these uses in the
context of the type of goods involved herein.
Ser No. 75/649,068
6
with the same type of semiconductor devices. Nothing
requires the exercise of imagination or mental processing
in order for purchasers of applicant’s goods to readily
perceive the merely descriptive significance of the term
SMARTRF as it pertains to applicant’s goods. There is
nothing incongruous about the combination of these two
clearly descriptive terms. In re Cryomedical Sciences,
Inc., 32 USPQ2d 1377 (TTAB 1994). The third-party
registration submitted by applicant of INTELLIGENT RF (“RF”
disclaimed) is not persuasive of a different result herein.
Decision: The refusal to register is affirmed.