Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

It Is Not All In The Family

By Tiffany Blofield on January 19, 2017
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Little Caesers

Although a precedential decision allowing a “Family of Marks” to be considered in the context of an ex parte prosecution of an application that has been refused under Section 2(e)(1) to show acquired distinctiveness, this ruling could not help Little Caesars overcome the refusal of its application for the mark “DEEP!DEEP! DISH PIZZA.”

Because “Deep Dish” is descriptive of a feature of the good (i.e., the pizza), there was no question the mark was descriptive.  Accordingly, Little Caesars sought to register the mark based on acquired distinctiveness under Section 2(f) of the Lanham Act.  To do so, Little Caesars needed to show that the “relevant public understands the primary significance of the mark as identifying the source of the product (i.e., the primary significance was that the goods are from Little Caesars), rather than the product itself (i.e., that it was pizza).

With pizza being one of my absolute favorite foods, I am very familiar with Little Caesar’s

Pizza Pizza

trademark.   The fourth largest pizza chain argued that the applied for mark “DEEP!DEEP! DISH PIZZA” should be viewed in light of its “family” of double word marks with explanation marks.  Unfortunately, the Board found that Little Caesars did not meet the substantial burden of showing such a family of marks.  Mere ownership of marks is not enough.

The Board discussed a prior decision wherein they rejected a company’s claim of a family of marks based on ownership of “SICLE” marks through ownership of the marks CREAMSICLE, FUDGSICLE and FRUITSICLE (among others).   In Consolidated Foods Corp. v. Sherwood Med. Indus., 177 U.S.P.Q. 279 (TTAB 1973).

You might ask what is a family of marks that has been recognized.  The Board observed that the common characteristics of a family of marks is typically the same suffix or prefix.   The most famous is probably the “MC” family of marks owned by McDonald’s.  For example, the company owns:

  • MCDONALD’S
  • EGG MCMUFFIN (& Design)
  • MCFLURRY
  • MCPICK

However, the Board noted that the concept of a “family” of marks was not necessarily limited to prefixes and suffixes.

What is your favorite “family” of marks?   Or, what do you think should be considered a “family” of marks?

Photo of Tiffany Blofield Tiffany Blofield

View my professional biography

Although my initial career path was to be one of the Supremes (not the musically talented ones with platform shoes and sequins, but rather, the nine wearing sensible shoes and pressed black robes in DC), I will likely stay…

View my professional biography

Although my initial career path was to be one of the Supremes (not the musically talented ones with platform shoes and sequins, but rather, the nine wearing sensible shoes and pressed black robes in DC), I will likely stay in Minnesota as I have never lived anywhere else (though I have traveled across many borders, including the pond, and various state lines).

My calling to the courtroom, led me to earn my law degree from the University of Minnesota, after receiving my undergraduate degree in Economics and Psychology from St. Olaf College. After law school, I quickly realized that I’m more at ease in the courtroom than in my own living room, so I became a litigator. Over the years, I have developed my own style of litigating (I’m trying to trademark it) and aggressively represent my clients whether I am protecting valuable intellectual property or tackling the interests of professional athletes. Although I am not as wacky or as flaky as Ally McBeal, litigation still holds its “entertainment value” after fifteen years in the profession. This year’s Valentine’s Day festivities are evidence (pun intended) of my passion — instead of celebrating the typical Valentine’s Day with dinner and roses, our litigation team celebrated the seventh anniversary of the then largest jury verdict in Minnesota. The verdict came after a nine year battle and, as a result, V-Day has now become known as “Verdict Day.” I’m hoping to rename more holidays soon.

Email
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Intellectual Property
  • Blog:
    DuetsBlog
  • Organization:
    Winthrop & Weinstine, P.A.
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo