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