The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) refused registration of SIDAMO as a trademark, for a second time, on March 27, 2007. In an electronic mail sent to Arnold & Porter LLP, a Washington based law firm representing the Ethiopian government (the applicant), the examining attorney said, “the refusal of registration under Section 2(e)(1) is continued, notwithstanding applicant’s claim of acquired distinctiveness under Section 2(f), 15 U.S.C. §1052(f). In a communication dated January 17, 2007, the Ethiopian government argued against the generic refusal under section 2(e)(1) and also argued that the geographical term is registrable under section 2(f). Basically, the USPTO is convinced, because it believes the mark is generic, that registering Sidamo “would grant the owner of the mark a monopoly, since a competitor could not describe his goods as what they are.” The argument regarding registrability of the mark Sidamo under section 2(f) does not seem to have had much imp...