Friday, April 17, 2015

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:


Post a Comment

<< Home