Joe Driskill, Jr.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Apr 30, 2002

No. 75580063re (T.T.A.B. Apr. 30, 2002)

Mailed: April 30, 2002
Paper No. 15
Bottorff
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________
In re Joe Driskill, Jr.
________
Serial No. 75/580,063
_______
Request for Reconsideration
_______
Before Wendel, Bottorff and Drost, Administrative Trademark
Judges.
Opinion by Bottorff, Administrative Trademark Judge:
On January 23, 2002, the Board issued its decision
with respect to the above-captioned application, affirming
the Trademark Examining Attorney’s final refusals (under
Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, 45 and 2(f), and 2(d)) to
register applicant’s guitar configuration. On February 23,
2002, applicant filed a timely request for reconsideration
of that decision. See Trademark Rule 2.144, 37 C.F.R.
§2.144.
THIS OPINION IS NOT CITABLE
AS PRECEDENT OF
THE T.T.A.B.
Ser. No. 75/580,063
2
Generally, the premise underlying a request for
reconsideration is that, based on the evidence of record
and the applicable legal authorities, the Board erred in
reaching the decision it issued. The request may not be
used to introduce additional evidence,1 nor should it be
devoted simply to a reargument of the points presented in
the applicant’s brief on the case. See In re Cosmetically
Yours, Inc., 171 USPQ 563 (TTAB 1971); see generally TBMP
§§1219.01 and 544.
We have given careful consideration to applicant’s
arguments in support of his request for reconsideration,
but we are not persuaded that our decision affirming the
refusals of registration is erroneous. Rather, for the
reasons discussed in our January 23, 2002 decision, we find
that the refusals to register are proper.
Accordingly, applicant’s request for reconsideration
is denied. Applicant’s time for filing an appeal, or for
commencing a civil action for review of the Board’s
decision, will expire two months after the date stamped on
this order. See Trademark Rule 2.145(d)(1), 37 C.F.R.
§2.145(d)(1).
1 Accordingly, the new evidence submitted with applicant’s
request for reconsideration is untimely and has been given no
consideration. See Trademark Rule 2.142(d).