Skip to content
Trademark Valet

Decisions · 85584271

PrecedentialRoutineNo later change on its docket

In re Michalko

Serial No. 85584271 · Decided 2014-05-30 · Other

What happened

Refusal upheld — ASSHOLE REPELLENT for a gag-gift spray can was found scandalous under the then-applicable Section 2(a) bar because dictionaries uniformly label the word vulgar, and the humorous novelty context did not change that (the scandalousness bar was later struck down by the Supreme Court).

The marks

Applicant

ASSHOLE REPELLENT

Amusement device, namely, a can with a spray top used as a gag gift and sold as a unit

Why this decision is significant

Precedential Section 2(a) scandalousness affirmance resting on uniform dictionary characterization of the term as vulgar — but the immoral/scandalous bar was struck down in Iancu v. Brunetti (2019), so the holding is of historical value only.

Research significance is Trademark Valet's editorial rating of how useful a decision is to practitioners. It is not a statement of precedential weight — that is the separate Precedential field, which comes from the Board.

Related decisions

The original record

Read the opinion and every filing on the Board's own docket. The summary above is our paraphrase, not a quotation from the opinion. The opinion is the authority.

Open this case on TTABVUE, the Board's docket ↗


Who checked this

Not yet reviewed by an attorney. This summary is generated from coded data, and it says so until a lawyer has read it.

Provenance — Generated from database rows without re-reading the opinion.

General information about how trademark law works. It is not legal advice about your situation, and reading it does not make anyone your lawyer.

← Back to the library