Decisions · 86882668
In re James S. Fallon
Serial No. 86882668 · Decided 2020-10-21 · Other
What happened
The Board upheld two of the refusals against registering THERMAL MATRIX for a heat-moldable liner in an anti-snoring mouthpiece: the product packaging did not clearly show the mark connected to the liner itself (rather than the whole device), and the applicant’s own advertising described the term as simply naming a heat-activated design feature, making it merely descriptive rather than a distinctive brand name; a third refusal, over a mismatch between the word ‘NEW’ on the packaging and the mark as filed, was overturned in the applicant’s favor.
The marks
Applicant
THERMAL MATRIX (THERMAL disclaimed)
"Heat responsive and malleable liner that is an integral component of an oral dental appliance used in the mouth and worn over the teeth of an individual while sleeping to reduce the effects of snoring and sleep apnea," in International Class 10
Why this decision is significant
Precedential decision providing a detailed framework for specimen sufficiency when registration is sought for a component/ingredient of a larger product, and applying the ‘substantially exact representation’ standard to visually set-apart descriptive matter on a specimen.
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
Disclaimer requirement upheld
In re Brainlab SE
The Board agreed that DYNAMIC SURFACE merely describes what Brainlab’s radiotherapy patient-tracking systems do (continuously track a moving patient’s body surface), so Brainlab must…
79371727 · 2026-05-26 · EXACTRAC DYNAMIC SURFACE
In re Nursecon, LLC
The Board affirmed the refusal to register NURSECON for arranging and conducting special events for social entertainment purposes, finding the mark merely descriptive because NURSE names…
88052194 · 2024-12-26 · NURSECON (standard characters)
Mixed result
In re James Haden, M.D., P.A.
The Board found the words ALLERGY CARE generic for allergy-treatment medical services, but because the mark is a stylized logo the applicant may keep its Supplemental Register application…
87169404 · 2019-12-04 · Design mark consisting of a red, horizontal oval with a white and blue border; inside the oval in stacked formation are the words "ALLERGY CARE" in stylized capital letters in white with blue outline; colors red, blue and white claimed as features of the mark (text extraction shows a gap where the mark image is embedded in the original, e.g. "seeks registration ... of the mark for" and "Applicant's mark is")
In re National Association of Veterinary Technicians in America, Inc.
The Board refused to register VETERINARY TECHNICIAN SPECIALIST as a certification mark for veterinary medicine services because the phrase simply describes a veterinary technician who…
87171093 · 2019-07-19 · VETERINARY TECHNICIAN SPECIALIST
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.
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.