## Facts

- The Newbridge Cutlery Company (Newbridge Silverware), an Irish company, sought U.S. protection (via the Madrid Protocol) for the mark **NEWBRIDGE HOME** in standard characters, disclaiming “HOME.”
- The application covered various goods including silverware, jewelry, desk items, and kitchenware in multiple international classes.
- The examining attorney refused registration under **15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(2)** as **primarily geographically descriptive**, asserting “Newbridge” referred to Newbridge, Ireland.
- The TTAB affirmed, finding Newbridge, Ireland a generally known place and concluding U.S. consumers would make a goods/place association.
- Newbridge appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit under **28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(4)(B)**.
- The parties did not dispute that the goods originated in Newbridge, Ireland; the dispute centered on U.S. consumer recognition of “Newbridge” as a place.

## Issues

1. Whether substantial evidence supported the TTAB’s finding that **Newbridge, Ireland** is a place **known generally to the U.S. public** for purposes of **§ 2(e)(2)**.
2. Whether, absent proof the place is generally known, the USPTO could rely on a **presumption of goods/place association** between the goods and Newbridge, Ireland.

## Decision

- The Federal Circuit **reversed and remanded** the TTAB’s decision.
- The court held **substantial evidence did not support** the finding that Newbridge, Ireland is **generally known** to relevant U.S. consumers.
- The court rejected the TTAB’s reliance on evidence such as the town’s population, tourism-related information, and references in gazetteers and internet sources as insufficient to establish general U.S. familiarity.
- Because the “generally known” element was not proven, the TTAB could not properly presume a goods/place association on the record presented.

## Legal Principles

- A mark is primarily geographically descriptive under **15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(2)** only if: (1) the mark names a place **generally known** to the public; (2) the public would make a **goods/place association**; and (3) the goods originate in the named place.
- The “generally known” inquiry focuses on **U.S. consumer perception**, not the foreign locality’s objective prominence, size, or importance abroad.
- **Internet availability** of information about a place, without more, does not establish that the place is “generally known” to the relevant U.S. public.
- A presumption of goods/place association may arise only after the USPTO first proves the location is **generally known** and the geographic significance is primary.

## Conclusion

The Federal Circuit concluded the USPTO failed to prove that “Newbridge” would be recognized by relevant U.S. consumers as a generally known geographic place, so the record did not support refusing **NEWBRIDGE HOME** as primarily geographically descriptive under § 2(e)(2).


In re Newbridge Cutlery Co., 776 F.3d 854 (Fed. Cir. 2015)