Fred D. Zemel
Partner
201-896-7065 fzemel@sh-law.comKey Contacts
Back
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has withdrawn its refusal to grant Apple Inc.’s trademark application for mark “iPad Mini.” The examining attorney previously denied the request on several grounds, including that the word “mini” was merely descriptive.
If the USPTO determines that a mark is “merely descriptive,” then it cannot be registered unless it acquires distinctiveness. In its initial refusal letter, the USPTO’s examining attorney stated that the term “mini” simply described “something that is distinctively smaller than other members of its type or class” and provided several examples in which similar marks involving the term were denied.
However, the USPTO has since rescinded its initial refusal. Apple’s application now has the green light so long the company includes a disclaimer about its use of the word “mini.” According to the agency’s latest letter, “Applicant must disclaim the descriptive wording ‘mini’ apart from the mark as shown because it merely describes a quality, characteristic, or feature of applicant’s goods.”
As explained by the examining attorney, “An applicant may not claim exclusive rights to terms or designs that others may need to use to describe or show their goods or services in the marketplace.” Therefore, Apple’s trademark application must be amended to include the following disclaimer: “No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “MINI” apart from the mark as shown.”
As Apple’s trademark process highlights, refusals issued in the initial action are not the final word. Depending on the circumstances, applicants can pursue further USPTO review or amend their applications to satisfy concerns raised by the examining attorney.
If you have any questions about this case or would like to discuss the legal issues involved, please contact me, Fred Zemel, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Related Posts
See all
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
USPTO Reverses Course on iPad Mini Trademark
Author: Fred D. Zemel
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has withdrawn its refusal to grant Apple Inc.’s trademark application for mark “iPad Mini.” The examining attorney previously denied the request on several grounds, including that the word “mini” was merely descriptive.
If the USPTO determines that a mark is “merely descriptive,” then it cannot be registered unless it acquires distinctiveness. In its initial refusal letter, the USPTO’s examining attorney stated that the term “mini” simply described “something that is distinctively smaller than other members of its type or class” and provided several examples in which similar marks involving the term were denied.
However, the USPTO has since rescinded its initial refusal. Apple’s application now has the green light so long the company includes a disclaimer about its use of the word “mini.” According to the agency’s latest letter, “Applicant must disclaim the descriptive wording ‘mini’ apart from the mark as shown because it merely describes a quality, characteristic, or feature of applicant’s goods.”
As explained by the examining attorney, “An applicant may not claim exclusive rights to terms or designs that others may need to use to describe or show their goods or services in the marketplace.” Therefore, Apple’s trademark application must be amended to include the following disclaimer: “No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “MINI” apart from the mark as shown.”
As Apple’s trademark process highlights, refusals issued in the initial action are not the final word. Depending on the circumstances, applicants can pursue further USPTO review or amend their applications to satisfy concerns raised by the examining attorney.
If you have any questions about this case or would like to discuss the legal issues involved, please contact me, Fred Zemel, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.