Forum Foundation

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Apr 11, 2000

No. 75195294 (T.T.A.B. Apr. 11, 2000)

Paper No. 17
ejs
THIS DISPOSITION IS NOT
CITABLE AS PRECEDENT OF THE TTAB APRIL 11, 00
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________
In re Forum Foundation
________
Serial No. 75/195,294
_______
Thomas W. Secrest for Forum Foundation.
Gerald C. Seegars, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office
106 (Mary Sparrow, Managing Attorney).
_______
Before Seeherman, Hohein and Wendel, Administrative
Trademark Judges.
Opinion by Seeherman, Administrative Trademark Judge:
Forum Foundation has appealed from the final refusal
of the Trademark Examining Attorney to register QUEST FORUM
as a trademark for “printed answer sheets on the topic of
problem solving with respect to college fraternities and
presenting a question and a plurality of answers for a
Ser. No. 75/195,294
2
person to express an opinion.”1 Registration has been
finally refused pursuant to Section 1, 2 and 45 and of the
Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051, 1052 and 1127, on the ground
that the applied-for term does not function as a trademark.
The appeal has been fully briefed; an oral hearing was
not requested.
We affirm the refusal of registration.
In order to determine whether the asserted mark has
been used as a trademark with respect to the identified
goods, we must look to the specimens. In re Bose Corp.,
192 USPQ 213 (CCPA 1976); In re Manco Inc., 24 USPQ2d 1938
(TTAB 1992); In re Scientific Methods, Inc., 201 USPQ 917
(1979).
The specimens submitted by applicant consist of a
single 8½ x 11” sheet of paper, with typescript on both
sides. The front page (and it is clearly the front, with
the word “over” appearing at the bottom), is headed THETA
XI FRATERNITY COUNCILOR NETWORK PROPOSAL and contains a
series of questions with respect to the fraternity
councilor proposal. On the back page, at the end of the
questionnaire, is a box with the following statements:

1 Application Serial No. 75/195,294, filed November 8, 1996 and
asserting first use and first use in commerce on October 11,
1996.
Ser. No. 75/195,294
3
“Fast Forum®,” “Opinionnaire®,” and
“Viewspaper® are registered trademarks
of the Forum Foundation, U.S. Patent
Office; used by permission. PLAN
Forum, QUEST Forum, CENSUS Forum,
Future Molding Game, and Fraternity
Councilor have been applied for to the
U.S. Patent Office as registered
trademarks of the Forum Foundation.
The indication that QUEST FORUM “has been applied for
to the U.S. Patent Office” is the only mention of QUEST
FORUM in the entire specimen.
In order to give an idea of the manner of use of the
asserted mark, a copy of the two sides of the specimen is
included as an attachment to this opinion.
We find that QUEST FORUM, as used on the specimens,
does not function as a trademark to indicate the origin of
applicant’s printed answer sheets. As the courts and the
Board have stated in numerous cases, the mere fact that a
term or phrase appears on goods does not necessarily make
it a trademark. Nor does mere intent that a term function
as a trademark mean that the term does, in actuality,
function in this manner. Thus, even the attachment of a
trademark symbol is not, in and of itself, sufficient to
make a term a trademark. See In re Manco Inc., supra, and
cases cited therein.
We have strong doubts about whether users of the
answer sheets would so closely examine the sheets that they
Ser. No. 75/195,294
4
would pay any attention to the listing of the various terms
that applicant has either registered or has applied for.
The list appears at the bottom of the second page, after
the “thank you for participating paragraph” and before the
“if you have any comments” paragraph. Moreover, the term
QUEST FORUM is placed in approximately the middle of this
listing. As a result, consumers are not likely even to
notice the inclusion of this term.2
Even if they do, however, they would not regard the
term as a trademark which identifies applicant’s printed
answer sheets. Rather, it appears as part of an
informational statement giving a laundry list of the
trademarks which applicant has or claims to have. Although
its appearance in this informational statement may tell
consumers, as applicant contends, that applicant intends
QUEST FORUM to be considered as a trademark, and that
applicant has expended time and effort in order to file an
application for this mark with the “U.S. Patent Office,”
the manner in which the term is used would not apprise
consumers that QUEST FORUM is being used as a trademark for

2 Even applicant’s attorney may have been concerned about
whether the Office would be able to find the term on the
specimens, since he chose to highlight the term on each of the
specimens which he submitted.
Ser. No. 75/195,294
5
the answer sheet on which the informational statement
appears.
Decision: The refusal of registration is affirmed.
E. J. Seeherman
G. D. Hohein
H. R. Wendel
Administrative Trademark Judges
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board