U. S. Cargo, Inc.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Nov 6, 1998

No. 74663449 (T.T.A.B. Nov. 6, 1998)

THIS DISPOSITION IS
CITABLE AS PRECEDENT OF THE
TTAB NOV. 6,98
Paper No. 11
PTH
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________
In re U.S. Cargo, Inc.
________
Serial No. 74/663,449
_______
Ryan M. Fountain for U.S. Cargo, Inc.
Dominic J. Ferraiuolo, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law
Office 102 (Thomas V. Shaw, Managing Attorney).
_______
Before Seeherman, Hairston and Wendel, Administrative
Trademark Judges.
Opinion by Hairston, Administrative Trademark Judge:
This is an appeal from the Trademark Examining
Attorney’s final refusal to register the mark U.S. CARGO
for “towable trailers for carrying cargo and vehicles and
for commercial purposes.”1

1 Application Serial No. 74/663,449 filed April 20, 1995;
alleging a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce.
Ser No. 74/663,449
2
The Examining Attorney refused registration under
Section 2(e)(2) of the Trademark Act on the ground that the
mark is primarily geographically descriptive of applicant’s
goods.
Applicant and the Examining Attorney have filed
briefs2, but no oral hearing was requested.
In order for registration to be properly refused under
Section 2(e)(2) of the Trademark Act, it is necessary to
establish that the primary significance of the mark sought
to be registered is the name of a place generally known to
the public and that the public would make a goods/place
association, that is, believe that the goods for which the
mark is sought to be registered originate in that place.
See In re California Pizza Kitchen Inc., 10 USPQ2d 1704,
1705 (TTAB 1988), citing In re Societe Generale des Eaux
Minerales de Vittel S.A., 824 F.2d 957, 3 USPQ2d 1450, 1452
(Fed. Cir. 1987). Provided that these conditions are met,
and the goods come from the place named by or in the mark,
the mark is primarily geographically descriptive.

2 Applicant submitted for the first time with its reply brief,
print-outs of third-party registrations for marks which include
the term “U.S.” Trademark Rule 2.142(d) provides that the record
in an application should be complete prior to the filing of an
appeal and the Board will ordinarily not consider evidence
submitted after the appeal is filed. In view thereof, the third-
party registrations have not been considered. We hasten to add
that even if considered, the registrations would not be
persuasive of a different result in this case.
Ser No. 74/663,449
3
Moreover, where there is no genuine issue that the
geographical significance of a term is its primary
significance, and where the geographical place named by the
term is neither obscure nor remote, a public association of
the goods with the place may ordinarily be presumed from
the fact that the applicant’s goods come from the
geographical place named in the mark. See, e.g., In re
Handler Fenton Westerns, Inc., 214 USPQ 848, 850 (TTAB
1982).
The Examining Attorney maintains that because “U.S.”
connotes the United States, a geographical location which
is neither obscure or remote, and applicant is located in
the United States, a prima facie case has been made for the
primary geographic significance of “U.S.” Further, the
Examining Attorney contends that the term CARGO is highly
descriptive or generic for applicant’s goods, and that the
addition of this term does not render the phrase sought to
be registered as a whole not geographical.
Applicant, on the other hand, argues that “U.S.” is
similar to the term “world”, in that, “it is too broad a
term to suggest any identifiable unit or place of origin to
consumers within the United States”; that the Examining
Attorney has offered no evidence that the United States is
known or noted for goods of the type involved in this
Ser No. 74/663,449
4
appeal; and that the word CARGO is neither highly
descriptive or generic of applicant’s goods. Further,
applicant argues that when the mark is viewed as a whole,
several connotations are possible, i.e., official
government cargo, cargo from the United States, or cargo
for shipment to the United States, but that applicant’s
particular goods, towable trailers, do not come to mind.
After careful consideration of the arguments herein,
we find that the mark U.S. CARGO, when viewed in its
entirety, projects a primarily geographic significance. We
find no merit to applicant’s argument that “U.S.” is too
broad a term to suggest any identifiable place of origin.
Unlike the term “world,” “U.S.” identifies a specific
geographic location. Although the Examining Attorney
offered no evidence in the way of dictionary definitions,
we may take judicial notice of the fact that “U.S.” means
the United States, and that the United States is a
geographic area with defined boundaries.3 Indeed, we
believe the exclusive significance of “U.S.” to most
purchasers would be the geographic area. Also, we find no
merit in applicant’s argument that the mark is not barred
under Section 2(e)(2) because there is no evidence that the

3 Webster’s New World Dictionary (3d coll. ed. 1997) at 1469
defines “U.S.” as “United States.”
Ser No. 74/663,449
5
United States is known or noted for the manufacture of
towable trailers. It is well established that a place need
not be well known or noted for the goods for a goods/place
association to be found. In re Loew’s Theaters, Inc., 769
F.2d 764, 226 USPQ 865 (Fed. Cir. 1985); and In re
Nantucket, Inc., 677 F.2d 95, 213 USPQ 889 (CCPA 1982).
The applicant here is located in Goshen, Indiana, and it is
reasonable to assume that applicant’s goods will come from
the United States. Applicant has not indicated to the
contrary. Therefore, we may presume a goods/place
association. Thus, whether the mark U.S. CARGO, when
considered in its entirety, is primarily geographically
descriptive of applicant’s goods is dependent upon the
impact of the word CARGO in the mark.
As noted by the Examining Attorney, the Board has held
that the addition of highly descriptive or generic matter
to the name of a geographic location generally does not
alter the primary significance of the mark. See, e.g., In
re Chalk’s International Airlines Inc., 21 USPQ2d 1637,
1639 (TTAB 1991) [PARADISE ISLAND AIRLINES is primarily
geographically descriptive of transporting passengers and
goods by air]; and In re Cambridge Digital Systems, 1
USPQ2d 1659, 1662 (TTAB 1986) [CAMBRIDGE DIGITAL is
primarily geographical descriptive of computer systems].
Ser No. 74/663,449
6
In this case, one of the functions of applicant’s towable
trailers is carrying cargo. In fact, applicant’s goods may
be described as cargo trailers. The impact, therefore, of
the term CARGO in applicant’s mark is one of referring to
applicant’s trailers themselves, and not the cargo being
carried in the trailers. Thus, purchasers and prospective
purchasers of applicant’s towable trailers are unlikely to
believe that U.S. CARGO connotes cargo itself. Rather,
such individuals are likely to believe that the mark
connotes a “U.S. cargo trailer.” We find, therefore, that
the mark U.S. CARGO projects a primarily geographic
significance when applied to towable trailers for carrying
cargo and vehicles and for commercial purposes. The fact
that applicant elected to not include the term “trailer” in
the mark sought to be registered cannot avoid the refusal.
See, e.g., In re Central Sprinkler Company,_____ USPQ2d
_____ (TTAB 1998) [The fact that applicant chose to not
include the term “sprinkler” in the mark ATTIC did not
avoid a finding of genericness, where the goods were
automatic sprinklers for fire protection of attics].
Ser No. 74/663,449
7
Decision: The refusal to register under Section
2(e)(2) of the Trademark Act is affirmed.
E. J. Seeherman
P. T. Hairston
H. R. Wendel
Administrative Trademark
Judges, Trademark Trial and
and Appeal Board
Ser No. 74/663,449
8