The CAFC does cacti in the Trivita case

The CAFC affirmed a trademark decision of the TTAB:

The Board found that the relevant consumer, knowing

that the goods are supplements containing nopal cactus

juice, would understand the mark NOPALEA to convey

information that the goods contain ingredients from the

Nopalea cactus. 

The Board based its finding on evidence

that “nopalea” is the name of a genus of cacti used in food

and supplements,that the word “nopal” is a common

name for prickly pear cacti including cacti in

the genus Nopalea, and that

the words “nopal” and “nopalea” are

used interchangeably to refer to cacti

of that genus.

Substantial evidence supports the Board’s findings, and

its conclusion that“nopalea” is merely descriptive of

TriVita’s goods.We affirm the Board’s decision that NOPALEA is not

registrable on the Principal Registerfor TriVita’s nutri-

tional supplements containing nopal juice

Link for  IN RE: TRIVITA, INC:
 http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/14-1383.Opinion.4-14-2015.1.PDF