## Facts

- Cordua Restaurants, Inc. operated Houston-area restaurants branded “Churrascos,” featuring South American cuisine centered on churrasco-style grilled meats.
- Cordua owned an existing Principal Register registration for the standard-character mark “CHURRASCOS” for restaurant, bar, and catering services.
- Cordua later applied to register a stylized version of “CHURRASCOS” for bar and restaurant services and catering.
- The examining attorney refused registration on the grounds that the applied-for mark was generic and merely descriptive for the identified services.
- Evidence in the record included dictionary definitions and marketplace use (e.g., menus and websites) showing “churrasco/churrascos” used in English to refer to grilled meat or a style of grilling and to restaurants featuring that style of cuisine.
- Cordua acknowledged “churrasco” is a Portuguese term meaning “barbecue.”
- The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board affirmed the refusal, concluding the stylized mark was generic and that the prior standard-character registration did not control the outcome.
- Cordua appealed the Board’s final decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

## Issues

1. Whether the applied-for stylized “CHURRASCOS” mark is generic for restaurant and catering services featuring churrasco-style grilled meats.
2. Whether Cordua’s prior registration of “CHURRASCOS” in standard characters precludes a genericness finding for the stylized form covering the same services.
3. Whether the stylization created a registrable mark by producing a distinct commercial impression or by showing acquired distinctiveness in the stylization.

## Decision

- The Federal Circuit affirmed the TTAB’s refusal to register the stylized mark.
- The court held substantial evidence supported the Board’s finding that “CHURRASCOS,” as used for the identified services, is generic because it names a key aspect or type of the services offered.
- The court rejected the argument that the existing standard-character registration barred a genericness determination in the later stylized-mark application.
- The court agreed that the stylization was not sufficiently distinctive to transform generic wording into a registrable mark and that Cordua did not show acquired distinctiveness attributable to the stylization itself.

## Legal Principles

- Genericness for services is assessed by identifying the genus of services and determining whether the relevant public primarily understands the term to refer to that genus or a central characteristic of it.
- A term may be generic for services even if it does not literally name the service category, so long as it names a key aspect that consumers use to identify that type of service.
- Prior PTO registration of the same wording does not create immunity from a later finding of genericness; genericness remains an absolute bar to registration.
- Stylization of generic wording is registrable only if the design elements are independently distinctive and create a separate commercial impression; ordinary or modest stylization is insufficient.
- Evidence of acquired distinctiveness must relate to the claimed source-identifying elements (e.g., the stylization), not merely to use of generic wording.

## Conclusion

The Federal Circuit upheld refusal of registration because “CHURRASCOS” was shown to be generic for restaurant and catering services featuring churrasco-style grilled meats, the earlier standard-character registration did not control the later application, and the stylization did not independently function as a source identifier.


In re Cordua Rests., Inc., 823 F.3d 594 (Fed. Cir. 2016)