In its original decision in 2016, the Board had ruled that
Coca-Cola's marks [E.g., COKE ZERO, SPRITE ZERO, and PIBB ZERO]
could be registered with a disclaimer of ZERO because the marks had
acquired distinctiveness. [
TTABlogged
here]. In 2018, the CAFC reversed, instructing the Board, on
remand, to consider whether ZERO refers to a "key aspect"
of the genus, and to make an express finding regarding the degree
of the term's descriptiveness. [
TTABlogged
here]. When the case got back to the Board, Coke was allowed to
enter its disclaimer of ZERO, and the Board dismissed the
oppositions.
In the subsequent appeal from the dismissal, Royal Crown raised