j. debeaute

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Jun 18, 2015

No. 85967716 (T.T.A.B. Jun. 18, 2015)

This Opinion is not a
Precedent of the TTAB

Mailed: June 18, 2015

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
_____

In re j. debeaute
_____

Serial No. 85967716
_____

Thomas D. Foster of TDFoster – Intellectual Property Law,
for j. debeaute.

Margery A. Tierney, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 111,
Robert L. Lorenzo, Managing Attorney.
_____

Before Ritchie, Adlin, and Hightower,
Administrative Trademark Judges.

Opinion by Hightower, Administrative Trademark Judge:
Applicant j. debeaute seeks registration on the Principal Register of the mark
MORINGA SKIN, in standard characters and with “MORINGA” disclaimed, for
“lotions for face and body care containing moringa” (as amended) in International
Class 3.1 The Trademark Examining Attorney refused registration of Applicant’s
mark under Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(1), on the
ground that Applicant’s mark is merely descriptive of Applicant’s goods.

1 Application Serial No. 85967716 was filed on June 24, 2013, based on Applicant’s
allegation of a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce under Section 1(b) of the
Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051(b).
Serial No. 85967716
- 2 -

After the Trademark Examining Attorney made the refusal final, Applicant
appealed. We affirm the refusal to register.
A term is merely descriptive if it immediately conveys knowledge of a quality,
feature, function, or characteristic of the goods or services with which it is used. See
In re Chamber of Commerce of the U.S., 675 F.3d 1297, 102 USPQ2d 1217, 1219
(Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Gyulay, 820 F.2d 1216, 3 USPQ2d 1009, 1009 (Fed. Cir.
1987). Descriptiveness determinations are made in relation to an applicant’s
identified goods or services, the context in which the proposed mark is being used,
and the possible significance the term would have to the average consumer because
of the manner of its use or intended use. See In re Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.,
102 USPQ2d at 1219. Descriptiveness is not considered in the abstract. In re Bayer
Aktiengesellschaft, 488 F.3d 960, 82 USPQ2d 1828, 1831 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
Applicant’s goods are “lotions for face and body care containing moringa.” The
Examining Attorney submitted evidence demonstrating that “moringa” is a genus of
plant with many uses.2 Of particular relevance, Internet evidence of record
indicates that moringa oil, derived from the seeds of the Moringa oleifera tree, is
employed in the skin care industry, as follows:
• An article from the website MoringaSource.com states that:
“Moringa oil is among the most desired oils in the formulation of skin
care products and cosmetics, chosen for its many antioxidants and
documented skin-rejuvenating properties.” The article notes that
Moringa oil can be found in hand lotions.3

2 See, e.g., October 8, 2013 Office Action at 19 (“Moringa” article from Wikipedia.com).
3 Id. at 2-3.
Serial No. 85967716
- 3 -

• The website MoringaFacts.net states that Moringa oil “has some
healing properties for skin allergies, irritations, wounds, blemishes,
and stretch marks. . . . In modern time it found its place in soaps,
shampoos, perfumes, and other skin care products.”4
• An article titled “The Benefits of Anti-Aging Moringa Oil on the
Skin” states in part that “Moringa oil is used in a variety of products
including anti-aging creams, massage oils, hair care products, face
creams, bath soaps and gels, perfumes and deodorants.”5
Applicant argues that MORINGA SKIN is suggestive because it is unclear
whether the phrase refers to the skin of a person or of a moringa fruit: “It takes
some thought to realize that applicant’s lotions contain moringa extracts and are
used for the skin.”6 The question, however, “‘is not whether someone presented with
only the mark could guess what the goods or services are. Rather, the question is
whether someone who knows what the goods and services are will understand the
mark to convey information about them.”’ DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med.
Devices Ltd., 695 F.3d 1247, 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1757 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting In re
Tower Tech. Inc., 64 USPQ2d 1314, 1316-17 (TTAB 2002)).
Based on the evidence discussed herein, we find that a consumer of lotions for
face and body care would immediately recognize MORINGA SKIN to convey
information about them, that is, that they are skin-care goods containing moringa.
Because the proposed mark as a whole immediately and directly informs purchasers
of features of Applicants goods, it is merely descriptive under Section 2(e)(1).
Decision: The refusal to register is affirmed.

4 Id. at 17.
5 April 21, 2014 Final Office Action at 7 (from ezinearticles.com).
6 Applicant’s Brief at 4, 4 TTABVUE 5.