Suppose you want to register a trademark that identifies a source of goods/services for your business. What if the trademark on the specimen of use has punctuation that is different from the drawing of the trademark in the trademark application? Does the punctuation in the trademark specimen of use have to match the trademark drawing exactly? The answer is NO! if the trademark drawing is a “substantially exact representation” of the trademark specimen.
Section 1 of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051(a)(1), (2), requires that every use-based trademark application must include a drawing of the applied-for mark and a specimen, showing actual use of the mark in commerce. see Trademark Rule 2.51, 37 C.F.R. § 2.51 (drawing requirement); Trademark Rule 2.56(a), 37 C.F.R. § 2.56(a) (“An application under section 1(a) of the Act … must include one specimen per class showing the mark as actually used in commerce on or in connection with the goods or services identified.”). “[T]he drawing of the mark must be a substantially exact representation of the mark as used on or in connection with the goods and/or services.” Trademark Rule 2.51(a), 37 C.F.R. § 2.51(a). The “drawing depicts the mark sought to be registered.” Trademark Rule 2.52, 37 C.F.R. § 2.52. Failure to comply with these requirements warrants refusal of the application. See, e.g., In re Guitar Straps Online, LLC, Serial No. 85047191, 2012 TTAB LEXIS 287, at *21-22 (TTAB 2012) (affirming refusal where drawing was not a substantially exact representation of the mark as used in commerce); In re Thomas White Int’l, Ltd., Serial No. 77080379, 2013 TTAB LEXIS 8, at *17 (TTAB 2013) (affirming refusal where specimen was unacceptable to support registration of the mark for the identified goods).
Can a difference in the punctuation of your trademark use be different from the trademark drawing in the application to be refused registration? In the recent trademark application of In re C-Sharpe Co., LLC, Serial No. 98269432 (Decided: May 29, 2025, T.T.A.B), C-Sharpe Co., LLC (“C-Sharpe”) filed a use-based trademark application for registration of the mark C SHARPE, in standard characters. In the trademark application, the trademark drawing shows the mark as C SHARPE, in standard characters, with a space between the letter “C” and the word “SHARPE”. C-Sharpe submitted a specimen of use bearing the trademark with punctuation of a forward slash “/” such that the trademark was “C/SHARPE”. The Examining Attorney refused registration under Sections 1 and 45 of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051, 1127, finding the trademark on the specimen does not match the trademark shown in the drawing of the trademark application. After a final refusal, C-Sharpe appealed.
The Board found that the drawing must be a “substantially exact representation” of the mark in the specimen. “[M]inor alterations” that do not create a new and different mark with a different commercial impression are acceptable. In re MN Apparel LLC, Serial No. 87876633, 2021 TTAB LEXIS 162, at *10 (TTAB 2021) (quoting In re Schecter Bros. Modular Corp., 1974 TTAB LEXIS 84, at *2-3 (TTAB 1974)). The Board determined that the only difference between the marks in the trademark drawing and specimen was a forward slash “/” in place of a blank space “ “. The Board acknowledged that, in some situations, adding punctuation can alter the meaning of a mark. For example, the Board cited to in the above Guitar Straps Online case, in which adding a question mark changed the meaning of the words “Got Straps” from a positive statement to a question and therefore altered the meaning of the mark.
In the In re C-Sharpe Co., LLC appeal, the Board determined that the forward slash was punctuation that did not alter the meaning or commercial impression of the mark as a whole. The Board held that the trademark application drawing and the trademark in the specimen created substantially the same commercial impression. The Board determined that “‘Punctuation, such as quotation marks, hyphens, periods, commas, and exclamation marks, generally does not significantly alter the commercial impression of the mark.’ TRADEMARK MANUAL OF EXAMINING PROCEDURE (T.M.E.P.) § 807.14(c) (Oct. 2018).” Peterson v. Awshucks SC, LLC, 2020 TTAB LEXIS 520, at *51 (T.T.A.B. 2020). The Board held that the addition of a forward slash in the trademark specimen does not add distinctive, source-identifying content to the mark and the mark creates substantially the same commercial impression with either a blank space or a forward slash between the two
literal elements of the mark. Thus, the Board reversed the refusal of the Examining Attorney to register the mark.
Trademark use-based trademark applications must include a drawing of the applied-for mark and a specimen, showing actual use of the mark in commerce. The trademark in the specimen and the application drawing should be a substantially exact match. If there is a difference in punctuation between the application drawing and specimen of use, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office may accept your specimen of use if the punctuation does not alter the meaning of the trademark or materially alter the commercial impression created by the trademark. As a practice tip, you should avoid the use of punctuation in a trademark such that the application drawing and specimen of use will be an exact match and be accepted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
