This Opinion is Not a
`Precedent of the TTAB
`
`
`
`
`
`Mailed: May 13, 2021
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
`
`————
`
`In re Mohawk Resources, Ltd.
`
`_____
`
`Serial No. 88606032
`
`_____
`
`Nicholas Mesiti and Thomas L. Sica of Heslin Rothenberg Farley & Mesiti P.C.
` for Mohawk Resources, Ltd.
`
`Angela Duong, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 104,
`Zachary Cromer, Managing Attorney.
`_____
`
`Before Bergsman, Adlin and Dunn, Administrative Trademark Judges.
`
`Opinion by Adlin, Administrative Trademark Judge:
`
`Applicant Mohawk Resources, Ltd. seeks a Principal Register registration for the
`
`proposed mark LIFTPOINT, in standard characters, for “vehicle lifts; vehicle lifts
`
`including two post, four post and mobile column lifts for fork truck service and
`
`maintenance; four post vehicle lifts; two post vehicle lifts; mobile column vehicle lifts,”
`
`in International Class 7.1 The Examining Attorney refused registration on the ground
`
`that the proposed mark is merely descriptive of the identified goods under Section
`
`2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(1). After the refusal became final,
`
`
`
`1 Application Serial No. 88606032, filed September 5, 2019 under Section 1(a) of the
`Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051(a), based on first use dates of July 26, 2019.
`
`

`

`Serial No. 88606032
`
`Applicant appealed and filed a request for reconsideration which was denied. The
`
`appeal is fully briefed.
`
`I. Evidence and Arguments
`
`The Examining Attorney relies on the following dictionary definitions of the
`
`proposed mark’s constituent terms:
`
`LIFT—“to raise from a lower to a higher position” and “a
`device (such as a handle or latch) for lifting”2
`
`POINT—“a narrowly localized place having a precisely
`indicated position”3
`
`March 15, 2020 Office Action TSDR 46-47, 55. She also relies on the “Oil & Gas
`
`Drilling Glossary” definition of a composite term which is substantively similar to
`
`Applicant’s proposed mark:
`
`LIFTING POINT—“connection point on a structure used
`to interface with lifting equipment”
`
`December 13, 2019 Office Action TSDR 4.4
`
`In addition, the Examining Attorney relies on evidence showing that in the vehicle
`
`lift industry, the terms “lift” and “point” are sometimes combined into the composite
`
`term “lift point” (or “lifting point”). For example, BendPak’s blog posting entitled
`
`“Two-Post Lift Safety: Lifting Points, Adapters and Common Sense” states as follows:
`
`certain common principles of safe usage apply to the
`operation of two-post lifts: engage the correct lifting
`points of the vehicle …
`
`
`
`
`2 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lift
`
`3 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/point
`
`4 https://www.iadclexicon.org/lifting-point/
`
`2
`
`

`

`Serial No. 88606032
`
`Lift Points and Center of Gravity … Because the center of
`gravity is not necessarily located at the ‘true center’ of any
`given vehicle, using the right lifting points is crucial
`during every lift.”
`
`Using Adapter Sets … Clearly labeled on your car lift
`manual, you will always find instructions for using lift
`adapters. Adapters, sometimes sold separately from the
`lift(s) they accompany, are meant to be used on trucks,
`SUVs and other vehicles with recessed lifting points that
`require a little ‘boost’ to be reached.
`
`There are people – having never experienced a vehicle
`slipping off its lift points – who will try to save a few
`minutes by setting vehicles by memory or feel …
`
`
`Id. TSDR at 11-14 (emphasis added).
`
`“Lift points” and “lifting points” are also known as “jacking points,” as revealed by
`
`a blog post on the ASE Deals website, which states “Customers frequently ask us,
`
`‘How do I know where to place the lift pads of my Two Post Lifts underneath my
`
`vehicle? Where are the best jacking points? Where are the safest jacking points?” Id.
`
`at 8. Thus, this blog post, like the BendPak post, reveals that vehicle lifts may include
`
`accessories such as lift pads and lift adapters, which enable lifts to connect properly
`
`to a vehicle’s “lift” or “jacking” points.
`
`Challenger Lifts, for example, offers a variety of adapters and footpads which it
`
`refers to as “lift point accessories” which “accommodate virtually any vehicle.”
`
`October 7, 2020 Denial of Request for Reconsideration TSDR 13 (emphasis added).
`
`These accessories include “dual pendant controls” which “expedite[] vehicle spotting
`
`by providing an unobstructed view to lifting points.” Id. at 14. BendPak also offers
`
`“lift point accessories” for its vehicle lifts. Id. at 16 (“BendPak’s durable, non-marring
`
`3
`
`

`

`Serial No. 88606032
`
`screw pads adjust to the height of the lift point, while drop-in frame cradle adapters
`
`come standard for use on SUVs and trucks.”) (emphasis added).
`
`The Examining Attorney introduced additional industry uses of the term “lift
`
`point” in connection with vehicle lifts. Specifically, a number of individuals
`
`participating in automobile repair discussion forums on the Internet (typically
`
`mechanics) use “lift point” in connection with not just vehicles, but vehicle lifts,
`
`including in one case Applicant’s vehicle lifts. March 15, 2020 Office Action TSDR 12-
`
`14, 18, 24, 36. For example, “NY98M3” states that he recently installed Applicant’s
`
`“A-7 Asymmetric 2 post lift,” and poses this question: “It seems that when the car is
`
`centered with the lift points, there isn’t enough room in front of the vehicle … Let
`
`me know what you guys think.” Id. at 12 (emphasis added). Thus, in this question
`
`“lift points” refers to the lift, not the vehicle.
`
`Applicant itself uses the term in connection with its vehicle lifts. An article on
`
`Applicant’s website entitled “How to Maximize Lift Safety” depicts one of Applicant’s
`
`lifts “set against the lifting points”:
`
`4
`
`
`
`

`

`Serial No. 88606032
`
`Id. at 15 (emphasis added).5 The article goes to instruct Applicant’s customers to
`
`“know the lifting points”:
`
`
`
`Id. at 16 (emphasis added). As explained in this section of the article, in order to “help
`
`shop technicians determine manufacturer-specific lift points,” members of the
`
`Automotive Lift Institute such as Applicant “include a copy of the book Lifting Point
`
`Guide (LPG) with every lift they ship.” Id.; see also October 7, 2020 Denial of Request
`
`for Reconsideration TSDR 23 (“The first step in making a proper lift is to find the
`
`vehicle manufacturer recommended lifting points for that vehicle.”). Similarly,
`
`vehicle manufacturers themselves include lift point information in their repair
`
`manuals. Id. at 10 (“To learn how to jack up a car properly, consult a repair manual
`
`to locate the recommended lift points and support locations for your vehicle.”). Thus,
`
`vehicle lifts are not only used in connection with lift points, but they come with lift
`
`point information.
`
`
`
`5 As shown in the photograph, the “arms” of Applicant’s vehicle lift are “set against the
`[vehicle’s] lifting points.”
`
`5
`
`

`

`Serial No. 88606032
`
`According to the Examining Attorney, this evidence “demonstrates that
`
`‘LIFTPOINT’ is a recognized industry term for the recommended points of contact
`
`when attempting to lift a vehicle using the applicant’s goods.” 12 TTABVUE 5. The
`
`term “is merely descriptive of the main purpose of the applicant’s goods, which must
`
`engage with a vehicle’s lift points in order to properly lift the vehicle.” Id. at 6. It
`
`“conveys an immediate idea regarding the use of the applicant’s goods especially with
`
`regards to lifting vehicles without damaging the vehicle or injuring the person
`
`operating the lift.” Id. at 8.
`
`Applicant did not introduce any evidence other than a printout from its own
`
`website which primarily promotes the safety and efficiency of Applicant’s identified
`
`goods. September 14, 2020 Request for Reconsideration TSDR 12-27. Applicant
`
`argues that its proposed mark is not descriptive because it “at best describes a feature
`
`of a vehicle, not a lift.” 10 TTABVUE 4. Furthermore, Applicant argues that the term
`
`is coined and fanciful. “The term ‘liftpoint’ is not a word … There is no evidence of
`
`any dictionary definition of ‘liftpoint’ in the record … A consumer, seeing the mark
`
`LIFTPOINT, cannot readily determine the meaning of the mark, let alone the goods,
`
`namely, vehicle lifts, without further investigation.” Id. at 6. In fact, “Applicant’s
`
`product does not contain a ‘lift point.’” Id. at 7.
`
`According to Applicant, the Examining Attorney’s evidence “shows no consistent
`
`use of the term ‘liftpoint’. Rather, the evidence frequently refers to ‘lifting points’,
`
`‘jacking points’, or ‘jack points’ rather than ‘liftpoint’ or even ‘lift point’.” Id.
`
`Furthermore, because both “lift” and “point” each have multiple definitions,
`
`6
`
`

`

`Serial No. 88606032
`
`Applicant’s proposed mark could have multiple meanings, such as “an elevator, a
`
`hoist, an airplane, a suitcase, a weightlifting apparatus, a protruding arch support
`
`for shoes, or one of many other products which relate to combinations of the
`
`definitions for ‘lift’ and ‘point.’” Id. at 10. At worst, according to Applicant, its
`
`proposed mark is suggestive rather than merely descriptive. Id. at 10-13. Finally,
`
`“LIFTPOINT is not commonly used,” by Applicant’s competitors or others, “to
`
`describe a vehicle lift.” Id. at 14.
`
`II. Decision
`
`Applicant primarily argues that to the extent “lift point” is descriptive of anything,
`
`it is descriptive of a feature or characteristic of vehicles, rather than vehicle lifts. 10
`
`TTABVUE 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13; 13 TTABVUE 2, 3, 4, 5.6 This argument is entirely
`
`consistent with the evidence. Indeed, “lift point” (and equivalent terms such as
`
`“lifting point” and “jacking point”) refers to the recommended location on a vehicle,
`
`usually at the bottom, from which to lift it. While Applicant’s argument is valid and
`
`consistent with the record, it does not answer the question before us.
`
`
`
`6 Applicant’s focus on a number of potential meanings of LIFTPOINT is misplaced. In re
`Chopper Industries, 222 USPQ 258, 259 (TTAB 1984) (“It is well settled that so long as any
`one of the meanings of a term is descriptive, the term may be considered to be merely
`descriptive.”). See also, In re IP Carrier Consulting Group, 84 USPQ2d 1028, 1034 (TTAB
`2007); In re Bright-Crest, Ltd., 204 USPQ 591, 593 (TTAB 1979). In fact, as the Examining
`Attorney and Applicant both point out, we consider descriptiveness “not in the abstract, but
`rather, in relation to the goods or services for which registration is sought.” 10 TTABVUE 5;
`12 TTABVUE 5, 7. “The question is not whether someone presented with only the mark could
`guess what the goods or services are. Rather, the question is whether someone who knows
`what the goods or services are will understand the mark to convey information about them.”
`DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Medical Devices Ltd., 695 F.3d 1247, 103 USPQ2d 1753,
`1757 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting In re Tower Tech Inc., 64 USPQ 2d 1314, 1316-17 (TTAB
`2002)).
`
`7
`
`

`

`Serial No. 88606032
`
`The question we must answer is whether the proposed mark LIFTPOINT
`
`“immediately conveys knowledge of a quality, feature, function, or characteristic” of
`
`Applicant’s goods, which are vehicle lifts, not vehicles. In re Chamber of Commerce of
`
`the U.S., 675 F.3d 1297, 102 USPQ2d 1217, 1219 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting In re Bayer
`
`AG, 82 USPQ2d at 1831); In re Abcor Dev., 588 F.2d 811, 200 USPQ 215, 217-18
`
`(CCPA 1978). We find that it does, because even though “lift point” refers to a location
`
`on a vehicle rather than a vehicle lift, that location is inextricably intertwined with
`
`vehicle lifts, as it is the place where vehicle lifts come in contact with vehicles. The
`
`term is not only commonly used in the vehicle lift industry, but it is also commonly
`
`used in association with vehicle lifts specifically, to describe how they function and
`
`the location where they come in contact with vehicles.7
`
`In fact, lift points exist to provide a safe and efficient place for vehicle lifts to raise
`
`vehicles; they do not relate to vehicle operation. Thus, while they are features of
`
`vehicles rather than vehicle lifts, at the same time their function is to enable lifting
`
`and, importantly, to work in connection with vehicle lifts.
`
`
`
`7 To the extent Applicant contends that there is a meaningful difference between LIFTPOINT
`presented without a space between the term’s two constituent words and “lift point” with a
`space, we are not persuaded. See, e.g., In re Omaha Nat’l Corp., 819 F.2d 1117, 2 USPQ2d
`1859 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (FIRSTIER merely descriptive of banking services); In re Carlson, 91
`USPQ2d 1198, 1200 (TTAB 2009) (URBANHOUZING merely descriptive of real estate
`brokerage, real estate consultation and real estate listing services); In re Cox Enters. Inc., 82
`USPQ2d 1040, 1043 (TTAB 2007) (“Applicant’s mark THEATL is simply a compressed
`version of the descriptive term THE ATL without a space between the two words. Without
`the space, THEATL is equivalent in sound, meaning and impression to THE ATL and is
`equally descriptive of applicant’s goods.”); In re A La Vieille Russie Inc., 60 USPQ2d 1895,
`1897 n.2 (TTAB 2001) (“the compound term RUSSIANART is as merely descriptive as its
`constituent words, ‘Russian Art’”).
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Serial No. 88606032
`
`In other words, lift points are essentially part and parcel of vehicle lifts, so much
`
`so that the Automotive Lift Institute, a vehicle lift industry organization, distributes
`
`its Lifting Point Guide to assist vehicle lift operators in locating the recommended lift
`
`points on particular vehicles. Vehicle repair manuals include this information as well,
`
`for the same reason. The information is directed to mechanics and others who
`
`purchase or operate vehicle lifts. Indeed, as Applicant points out, “people who work
`
`in the auto maintenance industry,” such as mechanics and others in the vehicle repair
`
`industry, are “the relevant consumers for Applicant’s product.” 10 TTABVUE 8. The
`
`record shows that these relevant consumers are trained (by Applicant among others)
`
`to use vehicle lifts in association with recommended vehicle lift points, for safety and
`
`other reasons. March 15, 2020 Office Action TSDR 15-16 (Applicant’s article on “How
`
`to Maximize Lift Safety”); October 7, 2020 Denial of Request for Reconsideration
`
`TSDR 10, 23. Thus, vehicle lift points are a “feature, function or characteristic” of
`
`vehicle lifts, because according to vehicle lift manufacturers, including Applicant,
`
`vehicle lifts must interact with recommended lift points for safety and other reasons.
`
`The record reveals the close bond between vehicle lifts and vehicle lift points in
`
`other ways. Not only do vehicle lift manufacturers include lift point information with
`
`their vehicle lifts, thus making lift point information an essential element of their
`
`goods, but vehicle lift manufacturers also sell “lift point accessories,” including lift
`
`pads, lift adapters and other vehicle lift parts designed specifically to work with
`
`vehicle lift points. Importantly, these “lift point accessories” − a generic or at best
`
`descriptive term used by Challenger Lifts and others − are accessories not for
`
`9
`
`

`

`Serial No. 88606032
`
`vehicles, but for vehicle lifts. This establishes that while lift points are features of
`
`vehicles, they are also, simultaneously, features or characteristics of vehicle lifts,
`
`because in order to function safely and properly, vehicle lifts must be used with
`
`recommended vehicle lift points. To accomplish this, vehicle lifts may require specific
`
`vehicle lift parts (“lift point accessories”) designed to work in connection with (and
`
`named for) lift points. It bears repeating that lift point accessories are accessories for
`
`vehicle lifts, not for vehicles.
`
`As the definition of the closely related term “lifting point” puts it, a “lifting point”
`
`is a “connection point on a structure used to interface with lifting equipment.”
`
`December 13, 2019 Office Action TSDR 4. In other words, a lift/lifting point may be
`
`on or under a vehicle, but it “interfaces” with, and is intended specifically for, vehicle
`
`lifts, and in this sense is an important characteristic thereof.8
`
`III. Conclusion
`
`The record leaves no doubt that LIFTPOINT is merely descriptive of Applicant’s
`
`vehicle lifts, which are intended to be used with vehicle lift points. In fact, when used
`
`in connection with a vehicle lift, LIFTPOINT merely describes a significant vehicle
`
`feature necessary for the safe use of the vehicle lift. In other words, a lift point is
`
`essential to the safe use and operation of a vehicle lift even though the lift point is on
`
`
`
`8 Even if Applicant is the first and only user of the term LIFTPOINT (without a space), that
`would be irrelevant. In re Fat Boys Water Sports LLC, 118 USPQ2d 1511, 1514 (TTAB 2018)
`(“The fact that Applicant may be the first or only user of a term does not render that term
`distinctive ….”); In re Sun Microsystems, Inc., 59 USPQ2d 1084, 1087 (TTAB 2001). Cf. KP
`Permanent Make-Up, Inc. v. Lasting Impression I, Inc., 543 U.S. 111 (2004), 72 USPQ2d 1833,
`1838 (2004) (trademark law does not countenance someone obtaining “a complete monopoly
`on use of a descriptive term simply by grabbing it first”).
`
`10
`
`

`

`Serial No. 88606032
`
`the vehicle. Finally, Applicant’s competitors in the vehicle lift industry use “lift point”
`
`in connection with their lift point accessories for vehicle lifts, and should not be denied
`
`the opportunity to continue doing so. See In re Boston Beer Co. L.P., 47 USPQ2d 1914,
`
`1920-21 (TTAB 1998), aff’d, 198 F.3d 1370, 53 USPQ2d 1056 (Fed. Cir. 1999); In re
`
`Abcor Dev., 200 USPQ at 217 (“The major reasons for not protecting [merely
`
`descriptive] marks are … to maintain freedom of the public to use the language
`
`involved, thus avoiding the possibility of harassing infringement suits by the
`
`registrant against others who use the mark when advertising or describing their own
`
`products.”).
`
`
`
`
`
`Decision: The refusal to register Applicant’s proposed mark on the Principal
`
`Register because it is merely descriptive under Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act
`
`is affirmed.
`
`11
`
`