IP Law Daily, TRADEMARK—TTAB: Refusal to register affirmed because proposed mark is trade name only, (Apr 10, 2026)

By Jonathan Anderson

The only specimen submitted shows the proposed mark as purely informational, identifying a name and location of a product distributor or business entity.

The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) affirmed the Examining Attorney’s refusal to register the standard character mark MAPLE LEAF CHEESE CO-OP (CHEESE CO-OP disclaimed) for cheese. The Board concluded that the specimen submitted by the Applicant does not show the proposed mark being used in the manner of a trademark. Rather, the wording identifies a distributor or business entity and does not distinguish Applicant’s goods from those of others (In re Maple Leaf Cheesemakers, Inc., No. 88663903 (T.T.A.B. Apr. 8, 2026)).

Background. Applicant, Maple Leaf Cheesemakers, Inc., sought registration on the principal register of the standard character mark MAPLE LEAF CHEESE CO-OP (CHEESE CO-OP disclaimed) for “cheese” in Class 29. The Examining Attorney refused registration under Sections 1, 2, and 45 of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051-1052, 1127, on the ground that Applicant’s proposed mark, as shown in the specimen, is being used only as a trade name and does not function as a trademark to indicate the source of Applicant’s goods and to identify and distinguish them from others. Applicant sought reconsideration, which was denied, and appealed.

Analysis. The Board examined Applicant’s specimen of use, which Applicant described as a “label and packaging on cheese.” The proposed mark appears on the bottom line of the label and is immediately preceded by “Distributed By:” and followed by a city, state, and zip code and website address. The font size, style, and color for “Distributed By:” is the same as the proposed mark. The location information and website address appear on the same line and in the same font and color, but in a slightly smaller size.

TTAB concluded that, based on the manner in which the proposed mark is being used, consumers will perceive MAPLE LEAF CHEESE CO-OP merely as a trade name, and not as a product source-identifier. The Board noted that in contrast, the packaging also contains the composite mark MAPLE LEAF CHEESE with a maple leaf and banner design that is stylized, in color, and displayed prominently at the top of the label. Although goods may be sold under more than one mark, the manner in which Applicant’s proposed mark is being used will not encourage consumers to view it as an additional trademark for the cheese.

Applicant argued that it does not own a business or entity or is part of a business or entity called MAPLE LEAF CHEESE CO-OP. However, the Board wrote that whether the proposed mark is being used solely as a trade name or functions as a trademark is a question of fact and should be determined based on the manner in which the name is used and the probable impact on the consuming public. The Board concluded that consumers encountering the “Distribute By: Maple Leaf Cheese Co-op” line of the label will perceive the proposed mark as purely informational, merely identifying a name and location for the distributor of the cheese.

The Case is Serial No. 88663903.

Judge: Wellington, T.

Attorneys: Brett M. Tolpin (Tolpin & Partners PC,) for Maple Leaf Cheesemakers, Inc. David Brookshire for the USPTO.

Companies: Maple Leaf Cheesemakers, Inc.

Cases: Trademark USPTO