Panavise Products, Inc.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Sep 9, 1998

No. 74581437 (T.T.A.B. Sep. 9, 1998)

Paper No. 13
GDH/cj
THIS DISPOSITION IS
NOT CITABLE AS PRECEDENT OF
THE TTAB 9/9/98
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________
In re Panavise Products, Inc.
________
Serial No. 74/581,437
_______
Kit M. Stetina of Stetina Brunda & Buyan for Panavise Products,
Inc.
Howard Smiga, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 102
(Myra K. Kurzbard, Managing Attorney).
_______
Before Hohein, Hairston and Walters, Administrative Trademark
Judges.
Opinion by Hohein, Administrative Trademark Judge:
Panavise Products, Inc. has filed an application to
register the term "INDASH" for "cellular telephone mounts."1
Registration has been finally refused under Section
2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1), on the basis
that, when used in connection with applicant's goods, the term
"INDASH" is merely descriptive thereof.

1 Ser. No. 74/581,437, filed on October 3, 1994, which alleges a bona
fide intention to use such term.
Ser. No. 74/581,437
2
Applicant has appealed. Briefs have been filed, but an
oral hearing was not requested. We affirm the refusal to
register.
It is well settled that a term is considered to be
merely descriptive of goods or services, 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 or use of the goods or services. See 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 or services in order for it
to be considered to be merely descriptive thereof; rather, it is
sufficient if the term describes a significant attribute or idea
about them. Moreover, whether a term is merely descriptive is
determined not in the abstract but in relation to the goods or
services for which registration is sought, the context in which
it is being used on or in connection with those goods or services
and the possible significance that the term would have to the
average purchaser of the goods or services because of the manner
of its use. See In re Bright-Crest, Ltd., 204 USPQ 591, 593
(TTAB 1979). Consequently, "[w]hether consumers could guess what
the product [or service] is from consideration of the mark alone
is not the test." In re American Greetings Corp., 226 USPQ 365,
366 (TTAB 1985).

Ser. No. 74/581,437
3
Applicant, referring to its promotional literature,
argues that such evidence "clearly and conclusively establishes
that its cellular telephone mounts are not disposed ’in, into, or
within’ the dashboard of the vehicle, but rather are mounted to
the dashboard" (underlining in original). Specifically,
applicant maintains that "its cellular telephone mounts are
attached to the dashboard, without the necessity of having to re-
work the dashboard." As a result, applicant notes, such mounts
"are intended for aftermarket sales to the general consumer
rather than being targeted primarily to dealers, as are
automotive components that typically require specialized or
extensive installation procedures."
In view thereof, applicant contends that the term
"INDASH" is not merely descriptive of its goods because
(underlining in original):
[T]he mark "INDASH" does not directly give
some reasonably accurate or tolerably
distinct knowledge of the characteristics of
cellular telephone mounts which are not
disposed or mounted in, into or within the
dashboard of the vehicle. Nor does the mark
"INDASH" tell the potential customer "only"
what the goods are, their function,
characteristics, use or ingredients. Indeed,
the NEXIS articles made of record by the
Examining Attorney demonstrate that the terms
"indash" and "in-dash" are also used in
relation to flashers, electronic temperature
gauges, cellular phones, compasses, CD
changers, car stereo components, radios, and
personal computers. Interestingly, none of
these articles specifically refers to a
"cellular telephone mount". Due to the wide
range of different components with which the
terms "indash" and "in-dash" are used, there
is simply no basis from the evidentiary
record to conclude that a consumer, upon
encountering Appellant’s mark in the
marketplace, would immediately form a mental
Ser. No. 74/581,437
4
association between such mark and "cellular
telephone mounts".
The Examining Attorney, on the other hand, insists that
the term "INDASH" merely describes "the most important and
central feature of the applicant’s goods," namely, "that the
goods are installed in the dashboard panel for use in mounting
cellular telephones" and thus are in-dash or "indash" cellular
telephone mounts. In support thereof, the Examining Attorney
relies upon the dictionary definitions, "NEXIS" database excerpts
and applicant’s product literature as discussed below.
Specifically, the record shows that The American
Dictionary (2d coll. ed. 1982) defines "in" as a preposition
meaning "[w]ithin the limits, bounds or area of" and as a prefix
connoting "[i]n, into, within."2 The same dictionary also
defines "dash" as a noun signifying, inter alia, "[a] dashboard,"
which is in turn defined as "[a] panel under the windshield of a
vehicle, containing indicator dials, compartments, and sometimes
control instruments."
In addition, the record contains various excerpts
retrieved from searches of the "NEXIS" database. The following
examples are representative and demonstrate the common manner in
which the terms "indash," "in-dash or "in the dash" are used
(emphasis added):

2 In addition, we judicially notice that Webster’s New World College
Dictionary (3d ed. 1997) similarly lists "in" as a preposition meaning
"in, into, within, on, toward". It is settled that the Board may
properly take judicial notice of dictionary definitions. See, e.g.,
Hancock v. American Steel & Wire Co. of New Jersey, 203 F.2d 737, 97
USPQ 330, 332 (CCPA 1953) and University of Notre Dame du Lac v. J. C.
Gourmet Food Imports Co., Inc., 213 USPQ 594, 596 (TTAB 1982), aff’d,
703 F.2d 1372, 217 USPQ 505 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Ser. No. 74/581,437
5
"[P]olice said coins, two in-dash
stereos and a cellular telephone were
reported missing." -- Chicago Tribune,
November 9, 1994;
"Honda offers as an option on the
Accord, Prelude and Acura Integra a hands-
free, in-dash, cellular telephone." --
Washington Times, July 22, 1994;
"Honda’s new cellular telephone features
a compact transceiver and mounts in the dash
where the radio usually is located." --
Chicago Tribune, November 21, 1993;
"Honda is taking this evolutionary step
in its 1994 Accord, Prelude and Acura Integra
models, offering the indash phone as a
dealer-installed option." -- Popular
Mechanics, November 1993;
"Kenwood recently introduced the
industry’s smallest 10-disc indash CD changer
that offers space-saving benefits." -- HFD-
The Weekly Home Furnishings Newspaper, March
29, 1993;
"In-dash single disc players and trunk-
mounted CD changers are the fastest moving
autosound products around, and new indash CD
changers will only add fuel to sales." --
Stereo Review, November 1992;
"Recognize the trend toward in-dash
mobile telephones and make adjustments in
your business accordingly." -- Cellular
Marketing, April 1992;
"There’ll be a factory CD changer
available, though a single disc indash unit
is standard." -- Autoweek, October 28, 1991;
and
"Few consumer electronics products today
are as complex as the indash ’head units’ of
car stereo systems." -- Stereo Review, May
1988;
Furthermore, the product literature which applicant
made of record refers to "InDash Custom Mounts" and contains the

Ser. No. 74/581,437
6
prominently displayed statement: "Introducing InDash -- Cellular
Phone Dash Mounts with Just the Right Fit!" Applicant’s
literature additionally touts the fact that its "[i]ndash mounts
eliminate mounting holes in exposed areas of the vehicle" and
states, in reference to photographs illustrating its product and
its manner of use (emphasis added):
AS THESE PHOTOS ILLUSTRATE, INDASH
INSTALLATIONS ARE CLEAN AND EASY. THE PHOTO
ABOVE SHOWS THE MOUNT INSTALLED IN THE DASH
PANEL: IF THE MOUNT IS REMOVED, NONE OF THE
INSTALLATION HOLES WILL BE VISIBLE. ....
The Examining Attorney, particularly in light of
applicant’s advertising literature, consequently urges that
applicant’s contention that its cellular telephone mounts are to
be attached to, rather than being installed in, a dashboard is
without merit (underlining and emphasis in original):
[T]he applicant’s goods, as evidence[d] by
its own promotional material, are installed
in the dashboard panel. The applicant’s
reliance on the argument that the "mounts are
not disposed ’in, into or within’ the
dashboard of the vehicle, but rather are
mounted to the dashboard" is merely a fine
point in semantics, and further, is
incorrect. The applicant’s goods are not a
freestanding device, rather, the goods
require some type of installation in the
dashboard. Further, whether the applicant’s
goods require "cutting or reworking" of the
dashboard or that the goods are intended for
after market sales, rather than being dealer
installed[,] are not determinative and are
irrelevant on the issue of descriptiveness.
Upon consideration of the arguments presented and the
evidence of record, we agree with the Examining Attorney that,
when applied to cellular telephone mounts, the term "INDASH"
immediately describes, without conjecture or speculation, a
Ser. No. 74/581,437
7
significant feature or characteristic of applicant’s goods,
namely, that they install in the dashboard of a vehicle and thus
provide in-dash mounting for cellular telephones. When viewed in
the context of the intended use of applicant’s goods, as shown
for example by the photographs in its advertising literature,
there is nothing which is inaccurate, indistinct, incongruous or
indefinite about the term "INDASH". Applicant’s promotional
material, as well as the dictionary definitions and "NEXIS"
excerpts, all make clear that there is nothing which requires the
exercise of imagination, cogitation, mental processing or
gathering of further information in order for purchasers of and
prospective customers for applicant’s goods to readily perceive
the merely descriptive significance of such term as it pertains
to cellular telephone mounts which are designed to be installed
on or within a dashboard. Plainly, whether cellular telephone
mounts are "disposed" in, into or within the dash of a vehicle,
such as through an opening in the dashboard, or are attached to
or mounted on the vehicle’s dash, such as "via the passage of
screws through the mounting holes and into the dashboard" as is
actually the case with applicant’s goods, in either instance the
installation is merely described as being "in-dash". Applicant’s
advertising, in fact, refers to a photograph of its product which
"SHOWS THE MOUNT INSTALLED IN THE DASH PANEL" (emphasis added).
As the evidentiary record makes clear, the combination
of the words "IN" and "DASH" into the term "INDASH" has a meaning
which ordinary usage would ascribe to those words in combination.
See In re Gould Paper Corp., 834 F.2d 1017, 5 USPQ2d 1110, 1112
Ser. No. 74/581,437
8
(Fed. Cir. 1987). Indeed, the "NEXIS" excerpts demonstrate that
the purchasing public is aware that a wide range of electronic
and other components, including cellular telephones, are in-dash
mountable. Consequently, the term "INDASH" would convey
forthwith to consumers of applicant’s cellular telephone mounts
that a significant characteristic or feature thereof is that they
install in a vehicle dashboard to provide in-dash mounting for
cellular telephones. Such term is therefore merely descriptive
with the meaning of the statute.
Decision: The refusal to register under Section
2(e)(1) is affirmed.
G. D. Hohein
P. T. Hairston
C. E. Walters
Administrative Trademark Judges,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
Ser. No. 74/581,437
9