Jet Am LLC

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Jan 8, 2015

No. 85621556 (T.T.A.B. Jan. 8, 2015)

This Opinion is Not a
Precedent of the TTAB

Mailed: January 8, 2015

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
_____

In re Jet Am LLC.
_____

Serial No. 85621556
_____

David L. Oppenhuizen of Waters & Oppenhuizen PLC,
for Jet Am LLC.
Paul Fahrenkopf, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 101,
Ronald R. Sussman, Managing Attorney.
_____

Before Taylor, Gorowitz and Masiello,
Administrative Trademark Judges.

Opinion by Gorowitz, Administrative Trademark Judge:
Jet Am LLC (“Applicant”) seeks registration on the Principal Register of the
mark ASSJACKED (in standard characters) for
Hats; headwear; jackets; pants; shirts; shorts; sweaters;
sweatshirts; swimwear; t-shirts; and undergarments in
International Class 25.1

1 Application Serial No. 85621556 was filed on May 10, 2012, based upon Applicant’s
allegation of a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce under Section 1(b) of the
Trademark Act.
Serial No. 85621556
- 2 -

The Trademark Examining Attorney has refused registration of Applicant’s
mark under Section 2(a) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. §2(a), on the ground that
the applied-for mark consists of immoral or scandalous matter.
After the Examining Attorney made the refusal final, Applicant appealed the
refusal. We affirm the refusal to register.
I. Discussion.
Section 2 of the Trademark Act provides in pertinent part that:
No trademark by which the goods of the applicant may be
distinguished from the goods of others shall be refused
registration on the principal register on account of its
nature unless it—
(a) Consists of or comprises immoral, deceptive, or
scandalous matter; …
The Patent and Trademark Office may prove that a mark is scandalous and
refuse registration by establishing that the mark is “vulgar.”2 In re Fox, 702 F.3d
633, 105 USPQ2d 1247, 1248 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (citing In re Boulevard Entertainment,
Inc., 334 F.3d 1336, 67 USPQ2d 1475 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (“Boulevard”)); In re Star
Belly Stitcher, Inc., 107 USPQ2d 2059, 2060 (TTAB 2013) (“Star Belly Stitcher”).
This demonstration must be made in the context of contemporary attitudes, in the
context of the marketplace as applied to the goods described in the application, and

2 Although the terms “immoral” and “scandalous” are typically discussed as though
basically synonymous, most refusals under the first clause of Section 2(a) have focused on
whether marks comprise vulgar and therefore scandalous, as opposed to immoral, matter.
See In re Mavety Media Group Ltd., 33 F.3d 1367, 31 USPQ2d 1923, 1925 n.* (Fed. Cir.
1994); In re McGinley, 660 F.2d 481, 211 USPQ 668, 672 n.6 (CCPA 1981); In re Lebanese
Arak Corp., 94 USPQ2d 1215, 1216 (TTAB 2010).

Serial No. 85621556
- 3 -

from the standpoint of not necessarily a majority, but a substantial composite of the
general public. In re Fox, 105 USPQ2d at 1248.
To establish that the term “ASSJACKED” is vulgar and thus scandalous, the
Examining Attorney introduced the following definition from Urban Dictionary:
to unwillingly participate in the act of anal intercourse,
or, to have your shit pushed in,
my homie went to prison and got ass jacked!
man I think someone ass jacked me at that party the
other night.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Ass%20Jacked – Exhibit to Office
Action dated September 10, 2012.3 Applicant contests the sufficiency of the
definition arguing that “the issue is whether the mark is scandalous to a
substantial composite of the general public – not whether there exists one isolated
definition of the mark referring to a scandalous or immoral act.”4 However, the
definition from Urban Dictionary is not the only evidence in this case. Both the
Examining Attorney and Applicant also introduced portions of Applicant’s website,

3 “Urban Dictionary (urbandictionary.com) is a slang dictionary with definitions submitted
by visitors to the website. The Board has in the past considered entries from this online
dictionary, comprising user-generated content, to be probative evidence ... The Board will
consider dictionary definitions taken from Urban Dictionary so long as the non-offering
party has an opportunity to rebut that evidence by submitting other definitions that may
call into question the accuracy of the particular Urban Dictionary definitions. Our
consideration of the Urban Dictionary definitions is with the recognition of the limitations
inherent in this dictionary, given that anyone can submit or edit the definitions. Further, in
the context of a Section 2(a) refusal involving the “immoral or scandalous” portion of the
statute, we recognize that while a definition in Urban Dictionary may be indicative of what
a term means to a composite of the general public, we are less sure that it represents the
meaning to a substantial composite, given that just one person can submit a proposed
definition. In the present case, the examining attorney submitted the Urban Dictionary
definitions early enough to allow applicant an opportunity to rebut this evidence if it
believed that the definitions were incorrect.” Star Belly Stitcher at 262, n. 3.
4 Appeal Brief, p. 3, 5 TTABVUE at 4.
Serial No. 85621556
- 4 -

including the following excerpt, which further supports the Examining Attorney’s
position that the term ASSJACKED is vulgar and scandalous:
“Our philosophy is that there are two ways of being
assjacked. A very literal term which needs little
explanation, and a figurative term which has a much
broader meaning. It is our belief, that unless you were
born, raised and remain under a rock, the latter of the
two assjacking [sic] has happened to you at some point or
another in your life.
To be more precise, we feel it necessary to explain to you,
our definitions on both assjacked events. To be assjacked
literally can happen when two consenting adults are in
the heat of the moment, and OOPS!!! - You’ve just been
assjacked. (Women can especially relate to this type of
assjacked, because we are usually the ones on the
receiving end of the mishap). Although for the women,
there is a suspicion always, that the assjacking was NO
accident!
The other way of being assjacked can be between any two
persons, business’ [sic] or entities. This type off [sic]
assjacking can occur when you have been bent over,
screwed and forced to take it without asking for, or giving
your consent to the act. This kind of assjacking can occur
anytime, anyplace, or anywhere and is usually when you
least expect it, or want it. The list of people that can, will,
and have ass-jacked you is endless. But let us give you a
few of our favorite examples: your bank, your boss, your
company (or former company) your neighbor, your ex-
wife/husband and their attorneys, every time you put gas
in your car, or as we like to put it "assjacked at the
pump"! We think you get our point, the possibilities are
truly endless!!”
Exhibit to Office Action dated March 31, 2013 and to Response dated September 27,
2013. The above discussion of the meaning of ASSJACKED, while somewhat
unspecific, is consistent with the definition given in the Urban Dictionary. The
literal meaning which, according to the website, “needs little explanation,” is clearly
Serial No. 85621556
- 5 -

a sexual act that is in some way irregular (“a mishap”), usually involving a woman
“on the receiving end.” The implication that deception and a lack of consent are
involved (a “mishap” that “was NO accident”) is strong. The sexual significance of
the term and the suggestion of force are confirmed by Applicant’s discussion of the
figurative meaning of the term ASSJACKING. “This type off [sic] assjacking can
occur when you have been bent over, screwed and forced to take it without asking
for, or giving your consent to the act … when you least expect it, or want it.” We
take judicial notice that the word, “screwed,” as used by Applicant, is vulgar slang
defined as “to have coitus.”5 Thus, Applicant’s website indicates that the term
denotes an irregular sexual act involving a lack of consent, and the Urban
Dictionary indicates, with more clarity, that it means forcible anal intercourse.
Applicant’s argument that the mark is fanciful and thus “there is no settled
definition of the mark, or even a definition that is widely recognized,” is
contradicted by the evidence, which establishes that the term ASSJACKED is a
vulgar slang term meaning and implying unconsented anal intercourse.
[E]ven though ‘the news and entertainment media today
may be vividly portraying degrees of violence and sexual

5 screwed. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/screwed (accessed: December 30, 2014).

The Board may take judicial notice of dictionary definitions, Univ. of Notre Dame du
Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imp. Co., 213 USPQ 594 (TTAB 1982), aff'd, 703 F.2d
1372, 217 USPQ 505 (Fed. Cir. 1983), including online dictionaries that exist in
printed format or have regular fixed editions. In re Red Bull GmbH, 78 USPQ2d
1375, 1377 (TTAB 2006).

Serial No. 85621556
- 6 -

activity that, while popular today, would have left the
average audience of a generation ago aghast” [In re
Mavety Media Group Ltd., 31 USPQ2d at 1926], there are
still terms that are sufficiently vulgar that they fall under
the prohibition of Section 2(a). See In re Tinseltown, Inc.,
212 USPQ 863, 866 (TTAB 1981) (“the fact that profane
words may be uttered more freely does not render them
any the less profane”; refusing to register BULLSHIT for
personal accessories and clothing). See also In re Star
Belly Stitcher, Inc., 107 USPQ2d 2059 (AWSHIT WORKS
refused as vulgar); In re Red Bull GmbH, 78 USPQ2d
1375 (TTAB 2006) (BULLSHIT again refused as vulgar).
While each of these three decisions was decided on its own
merits and record relevant to the time of decision, they
illustrate the enduring vulgarity of some terms, despite
changing times or norms.
In re Michalko, 110 USPQ2d 1949, 1951 (TTAB 2014) (finding the term “asshole” to
be vulgar and offensive to the conscience of a substantial composite of the general
public). Similarly, we find that the term ASSJACKED is vulgar and therefore
scandalous from the standpoint of a substantial composite of the general public and,
as such, registration is prohibited under Section 2(a) of the Trademark Act.
Decision: The refusal to register Applicant’s mark ASSJACKED is affirmed.