California Company Files Trademark Application for BLOODY MARY ON DRAFT

If brunch is your thing, you might be into this - on April 26th a company in California called In A Jar, LLC filed a federal trademark application for BLOODY MARY ON DRAFT. The application covers, of course, "alcoholic cocktail mixes" in Class 33.

Even better for brunchers, the application indicates that this trademark has been in use with the associated goods at least as early as March 1, 2017, indicating the underlying goods are already for sale and probably out there in the marketplace.

According to the company's website, the company (which appears to be doing business as "Preservation") will provide a bar with a kegerator that works with a bar's existing tap lines, as well as various Bloody Mary mixes that can be used with the system, so that a bar can pour Bloody Mary's just as they would pour beer (ed. - is this available for home use as well?).

Will this application face a Section 2(e)(1) refusal, which prohibits the registration of "merely descriptive" trademarks on the Principal Register? See TMEP 1209.01(b) ("A mark is considered merely descriptive if it describes an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose, or use of the specified goods or services"). Maybe. We will find out in approximately three months when this application is assigned to a Examining Attorney at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

So, would you try a Bloody Mary from a tap? I think I'd give it a shot.

A KATE SPADE Hotel, Restaurant?

Did you every wish your favorite fashion designer would open a hotel, restaurant, or spa? For fans of Kate Spade, their dreams may be coming true. On November 17th, Kate Spade, LLC filed a federal trademark application for KATE SPADE in Class 43 for "hotel, café, restaurant and spa services."

The fashion company filed this trademark application on a 44(d) basis, meaning it already filed a similar trademark application in a foreign country within the past six months and is basing its priority date on that application (in this case, a trademark application in Australia). For this application to register in the U.S., the Australian application must first mature into a registration in that country (or Kate Spade must start using this mark in the U.S. in conjunction with the listed services).

So will Kate Spade be offering hotel, restaurant, or spa services in the future? Pay attention to this trademark application to find out.

A Pabst Brewing Company Restaurant? Maybe, Based on Recent Trademark Application

Do you love the taste of a cold PBR? Do you think it tastes like George Washington going down your throat to fight the Redcoats? Do you love it so much you wish Pabst had its own restaurant so you could enjoy its food while drinking its beer? If so, you might be in luck.

On August 3rd, the Pabst Brewing Company filed a federal trademark application for PABST in Class 043 for "[r]estaurant services." The company filed this trademark application on an intent-to-use basis, which indicates it is not using the mark in conjunction with these services in commerce yet, but has a bona fide intention to do so in the near future. In other words, the Pabst Brewing Company is potentially considering opening a restaurant under the PABST name.

According to my quick search of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office database, Pabst Brewing Company owns 271 live trademark applications or registrations, although this one is the first one for PABST as it relates to restaurant services.

Yard House Attempts Register PINT NIGHT as a Trademark

"Pint Night" is a common phrase in the restaurant and bar industry. However, one restaurant is apparently trying to obtain the exclusive, nationwide right to use the term.

On April 27th, Yard House USA, Inc. filed a federal trademark application for the phrase PINT NIGHT. Yard House is part of the Darden group of restaurants, which also owns the Olive Garden, Longhorn Steakhouse, and Seasons 52, among others.

Yard House filed this trademark application in Class 041 for "[e]ntertainment services, namely, beverage tastings" and in Class 043 for "[r]estaurant and bar services." Both classes were filed on an intent-to-use basis.

Restaurant and bar owners - don't panic yet. I have a feeling this attempt to register PINT NIGHT as a trademark will not be successful.

It is well established that "[s]logans and other terms that are merely informational in nature, or common laudatory phrases or statements that would ordinarily be used in business or in the particular trade or industry, are not registrable." TMEP 1202.04. To make this determination, the Trademark Office will consider the commercial impression the mark makes on the relevant public. "The more commonly a phrase is used in everyday parlance, the less likely the public will use it to identify only one source and the less likely the phrase will be recognized by purchasers as a trademark or service mark." Id.

Is the phrase PINT NIGHT commonly used in restaurant and bar industry? Would the relevant public think PINT NIGHT specifically refers to a Yard House event or would they not associate the term with any specific bar or restaurant? 

Given the popularity of PINT NIGHT in the industry, I think Yard House will have an extremely difficult time attempting to register this phrase (or enforce it). Expect an Office Action to this effect when this application is assigned to an examining attorney within the next three months.

Is MillerCoors Opening a Line of Bars and Restaurants?

MillerCoors, LLC might be moving into the bar and restaurant space according to a recent trademark filing at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. On January 28th, the company filed a federal trademark application for COORS.

Everybody knows the Coors brand of beers, that isn't the interesting part. The interesting part is the services listed on this particular trademark application. The company filed this COORS trademark application in Class 043 for "[b]ar services; [r]estaurant services." This application was filed on an intent-to-use basis, meaning the company is not using the COORS mark in conjunction with these services yet but has a bona fide intention to do so in the near future.

What does that mean? It means MillerCoors has developed some sort of plan to move into the bar or restaurant space (the bona fide intention requires more than just an idea for use). I wouldn't be surprised to see the company announce the opening of a bar or restaurant location sometime within the next year.

New Restaurant From Dogfish Head Brewery?

On November 18, Dogfish Head Marketing, LLC (an entity with the same address as the Dogfish Head Brewery) filed a federal trademark application for CHESAPEAKE & MAINE in class 43 for "[r]estaurant and bar services; Serving food and drinks[.]"

According to Dogfish Head's website, the company does serve food at its brewery and operates three Dogfish Head Alehouses around the Washington, D.C. area. However, the website does not mention a Chesapeake & Maine restaurant, which this trademark application clearly seems to indicate. Given that Dogfish Head filed the trademark application on an intent-to-use basis, this makes sense (it means Dogfish Head is not using the trademark in commerce yet). It appears this Chesapeake & Maine restaurant may be in the early stages of development but is not yet open. Keep an eye out for a possible new restaurant announcement from Dogfish Head within the next year or so.

Delicious SPAGHETTI MEATBALLWICH Trademark Filed

On September 6th, a restaurant in Tarzana, California filed a federal trademark application for the term SPAGHETTI MEATBALLWICH as it relates to "[s]andwiches; Sandwiches, namely, Meatball; Spaghetti and meatballs."

The applicant's specimen of use, shown above, is a screenshot of the sandwich on its website. Although website screenshots are not always acceptable specimens, this one should work.

According to Section 904.03(i) of the Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure, "a webpage can constitute a 'display associated with the goods' [which is an acceptable specimen] if it:

(1) contains a picture or textual description of the identified goods;

(2) shows the mark in association with the goods; and

(3) provides a means for ordering the identified goods."

As you can see on the specimen above, the webpage certainly shows a pictorial description of the sandwich, the trademark is in large letters right above the picture, and in the top right corner there is the ability to order online. If the webpage did not contain one of these elements, such as the ability to order the sandwich, it may not have been an acceptable a specimen.

If the applicant is successful in obtaining this registration, they will become the only restaurant that can name a sandwich the "Spaghetti Meatballwich."