[00:00:00] Speaker 04:
Mr. Vincente.

[00:00:10] Speaker 04:
Good morning, Your Honors.

[00:00:15] Speaker 01:
May it please the Court.

[00:00:17] Speaker 01:
My name is Paul Vincente.

[00:00:18] Speaker 01:
I represent the appellant Well Living Lab Inc.

[00:00:21] Speaker 01:
on this appeal.

[00:00:22] Speaker 01:
This is an appeal from a TTAB decision refusing the registration of my client's trademark.

[00:00:29] Speaker 00:
In the blue brief at 24, you argue that because well-living is vague, as you put it, and might describe, quote, numerous other possible goods and services ellipses, it can be nothing other than suggestive of applicant services.

[00:00:48] Speaker 00:
But our precedent in dupro, dual pro versus in virus says the test for descriptiveness

[00:00:55] Speaker 00:
quote, is not whether someone presented with only the mark could guess what the goods or services are, close quote, explaining that, quote, the question is whether someone who knows what the goods and services are will understand the mark to convey information about them.

[00:01:14] Speaker 00:
What authority supports your proposition that such alternative, quote, other possible goods or services is sufficient to turn a descriptive mark into a suggestive one?

[00:01:24] Speaker 01:
Well, I think, first of all, the driven innovations case from last year from this Court, which describes what merely descriptive means.

[00:01:31] Speaker 01:
And it means that the consumer immediately, without any imagination or leap, knows exactly what the specific services are.

[00:01:41] Speaker 01:
And when you have a case where you have a term that can prize as many different meanings across a wide array of different subsections, certainly it suggests... Do you think we rejected all our prior law?

[00:01:53] Speaker 01:
No, I think both of those premises are, I don't think they're conflicting.

[00:01:59] Speaker 01:
I think what the Driven Innovations case says is when you have a mark, and in that case it was blog, certainly .blog was the mark, and certainly it suggests that it provides information through blogs.

[00:02:12] Speaker 01:
There's no question it suggests the service is well living lab, but it doesn't merely describe them because there's several different definitions.

[00:02:19] Speaker 01:
And I think that's where the error was here.

[00:02:21] Speaker 00:
Well, your other definition

[00:02:23] Speaker 00:
is archaic.

[00:02:26] Speaker 00:
And they took it into consideration.

[00:02:28] Speaker 01:
I think that's one of the errors, Your Honor, if I could just explain for a moment.

[00:02:33] Speaker 01:
I think, first of all, the somewhat archaic notation by Oxford did not apply to the adjective, which is a different definition than the noun.

[00:02:42] Speaker 01:
And the somewhat archaic notation only applies to the noun.

[00:02:45] Speaker 01:
The noun is defined as leading a good life

[00:02:50] Speaker 01:
a moral life.

[00:02:51] Speaker 01:
The adjective is leading a virtuous or in later use, a comfortable life.

[00:02:56] Speaker 01:
I think there's a distinction there.

[00:02:58] Speaker 01:
And the in later use comment by Oxford, I think... So you're equating a comfortable life with a healthy life.

[00:03:03] Speaker 01:
I think it's a bit different.

[00:03:05] Speaker 01:
I think there's different between a comfortable life and a healthy or nutritional or physical health from a physical standpoint life.

[00:03:13] Speaker 01:
I think it's a different meaning.

[00:03:14] Speaker 01:
And that's what I think driven innovation says.

[00:03:18] Speaker 01:
Services from blogs, yes.

[00:03:20] Speaker 01:
But well-living has many different meanings.

[00:03:24] Speaker 03:
Do you agree that one of those meanings is a healthy life or nutritious life?

[00:03:29] Speaker 01:
I do.

[00:03:30] Speaker 01:
But I think what the board found was it means healthiness.

[00:03:34] Speaker 01:
Well, healthiness cuts across so many different spectrums.

[00:03:38] Speaker 01:
And just looking at the examiner's evidence, it means nutritional health.

[00:03:43] Speaker 01:
It means physical health.

[00:03:44] Speaker 01:
It's used as financial health.

[00:03:46] Speaker 01:
It's used as mental health.

[00:03:48] Speaker 01:
well-living.

[00:03:48] Speaker 01:
These are the terms, even if you take the board's decision and looking at those examples, it cuts across a wide array of different industries and different meanings that the consumer would have to parse through in order to reach the specific services.

[00:04:01] Speaker 03:
And I think that's the... What about when it's put with laboratory or labs, with labs, when it's put with labs together

[00:04:11] Speaker 03:
Ben, you might be thinking that the well-living would mean nutrition or health, since it's labs.

[00:04:17] Speaker 03:
And so labs suggest something maybe more in the medical or health field.

[00:04:24] Speaker 01:
We would submit, Your Honor, that when you take well-living and put it with lab, it's really an aspirational mark, just like one of the cases we submitted for vacuums, healthy homes.

[00:04:34] Speaker 01:
What we're saying is well-living lab.

[00:04:36] Speaker 01:
Test your products.

[00:04:36] Speaker 01:
You can have a well-living philosophy, a well-living life.

[00:04:39] Speaker 01:
And I think that's what the consumer is going to have to parse through.

[00:04:42] Speaker 01:
It's not immediate.

[00:04:43] Speaker 01:
And I think the board even acknowledged that.

[00:04:45] Speaker 01:
The board said the definition, the dictionary definition, which, again, we think it was an error to say it's somewhat archaic.

[00:04:53] Speaker 01:
But they said, yes, we recognize consumers are going to associate that definition.

[00:04:57] Speaker 01:
Your Honor, we submit that should have ended the inquiry.

[00:04:59] Speaker 01:
That means there's more than one definition that the board found consumers would consider.

[00:05:04] Speaker 01:
That means there's multiple steps that the consumer would have to go through to reach.

[00:05:07] Speaker 01:
So they couldn't look at other evidence?

[00:05:09] Speaker 01:
No, they can look at other evidence.

[00:05:11] Speaker 00:
You said it should have ended it?

[00:05:13] Speaker 01:
No, I think it should have ended it when they took all evidence and said, yes, we agree that the dictionary definition would be considered and even recognized by some consumers.

[00:05:21] Speaker 00:
You have to take... But outweighed substantially by a...

[00:05:25] Speaker 01:
But I think if you take the other evidence, Your Honor, I do think you look at it.

[00:05:28] Speaker 01:
We're not suggesting otherwise.

[00:05:30] Speaker 01:
But look at that other evidence.

[00:05:31] Speaker 01:
Look at how many different uses of just the general word health is used.

[00:05:36] Speaker 01:
Nutritional, physical, financial health, mental health, health insurance, family health, health in the workplace.

[00:05:43] Speaker 01:
These are all different areas.

[00:05:45] Speaker 01:
And we would submit, Your Honor, that that means it's a different mark.

[00:05:49] Speaker 01:
It's certainly suggestive.

[00:05:51] Speaker 01:
But it's not merely descriptive.

[00:05:53] Speaker 01:
It's not a situation.

[00:05:54] Speaker 00:
You argue that well-living lab is unitary by virtue of its incongruity.

[00:06:00] Speaker 00:
In what ways could well-living lab be incongruous?

[00:06:05] Speaker 01:
Well, I think, first of all, it's a term.

[00:06:06] Speaker 01:
And I think the record reflects this.

[00:06:07] Speaker 01:
It's nowhere else used.

[00:06:08] Speaker 01:
It wasn't found anywhere else used, well-living lab.

[00:06:11] Speaker 01:
So it's a composite mark.

[00:06:12] Speaker 01:
And it's a double entendre.

[00:06:15] Speaker 01:
So you take the term.

[00:06:16] Speaker 00:
Double entendre, if you were designing devices to catch

[00:06:21] Speaker 00:
children when they fell into wells, that would be a double entendre.

[00:06:26] Speaker 01:
But again, I think it's aspirational, Your Honor, because we're not selling well-living labs.

[00:06:30] Speaker 01:
We're saying, test your products here, and you can have a well-living life.

[00:06:34] Speaker 01:
What that means to consumers could mean any different number of meanings.

[00:06:38] Speaker 01:
And I think that's what all of the evidence reflects, not just the dictionary definition, but the evidence that the examiners... Designed to attract trolls who live in wells.

[00:06:47] Speaker 01:
Perhaps.

[00:06:48] Speaker 04:
So you're looking for registration on the principal register, is that right?

[00:06:53] Speaker 01:
That's correct.

[00:06:54] Speaker 04:
And because it seems to me that everything that you've been saying could conceivably, with time, support such registration with a showing of secondary meaning.

[00:07:06] Speaker 04:
But that would mean starting out on the supplemental register.

[00:07:10] Speaker 04:
And that's not of interest?

[00:07:13] Speaker 04:
Or is that the fallback?

[00:07:14] Speaker 01:
Well, certainly that would be the fallback, Your Honor.

[00:07:16] Speaker 01:
But we would submit that we think that this is not a mark that requires a showing of secondary meaning.

[00:07:21] Speaker 01:
We think it's a suggestive mark.

[00:07:23] Speaker 01:
We think the Driven Innovations case.

[00:07:24] Speaker 04:
But that's really the question, isn't it?

[00:07:25] Speaker 01:
Yes.

[00:07:26] Speaker 01:
Yes, Your Honor.

[00:07:28] Speaker 01:
OK.

[00:07:28] Speaker 01:
I agree with that.

[00:07:30] Speaker 01:
And I think that Driven Innovations case dot blog, and the definition was services provided on blogs, it certainly suggests what the services are.

[00:07:39] Speaker 01:
But it doesn't specifically describe them.

[00:07:41] Speaker 01:
That's what this Court held.

[00:07:43] Speaker 01:
mean that the consumer's going to immediately go to what the services are.

[00:07:47] Speaker 01:
There has to be some imagination and some mental leap.

[00:07:52] Speaker 01:
And I would just add, Your Honor, to stress that the definition of general health, that physical health that the board said is the more modern use, that's nowhere found in any dictionary.

[00:08:03] Speaker 01:
And we just don't think that supports a substantial evidence standard here.

[00:08:09] Speaker 01:
I would just add, Your Honor, this idea of the more modern use, the test

[00:08:12] Speaker 01:
I think we all agree with this.

[00:08:14] Speaker 01:
The test isn't, well, what would more consumers believe?

[00:08:17] Speaker 01:
That's not the test.

[00:08:18] Speaker 01:
The test is, would the average consumer consider a number of meanings?

[00:08:22] Speaker 01:
Not would more consumers go with a predominant meaning, or would less consumers go with the dictionary meaning.

[00:08:28] Speaker 01:
It's not a quantitative analysis.

[00:08:31] Speaker 01:
And I think that what the board found here, and I think this is legal error, number one, when they said, we acknowledge that consumers will associate this mark with the nondescriptive dictionary definition.

[00:08:42] Speaker 01:
That should have ended the inquiry.

[00:08:44] Speaker 01:
Second, on the factual error, it associated the somewhat archaic notation with the adjective, and that's not the case.

[00:08:52] Speaker 01:
Oxford Dictionary is very clear on that, and it's a different meaning.

[00:08:56] Speaker 04:
But, you know, underlying everything that the board did necessarily is the concept that from now on, with registration on the principal register, that ends it.

[00:09:07] Speaker 04:
Well-living is exclusively the property of your client and the

[00:09:12] Speaker 04:
shift from genericness to exclusivity has to be a factor in every trademark registration, is it not?

[00:09:23] Speaker 01:
I agree, Your Honor.

[00:09:23] Speaker 01:
But the mark here is well-living lab.

[00:09:25] Speaker 01:
It's not just well-living.

[00:09:28] Speaker 01:
It's a composite mark.

[00:09:29] Speaker 01:
We're not suggesting that just taking well-living, that's sufficient.

[00:09:33] Speaker 01:
It's a made-up term.

[00:09:35] Speaker 01:
It's well-living lab.

[00:09:37] Speaker 01:
And we think that's what takes it out of, certainly out of genericness and descriptiveness here.

[00:09:43] Speaker 01:
Unless Your Honors have any other questions, I'll sit.

[00:09:46] Speaker 04:
Thank you.

[00:09:47] Speaker 04:
Thank you, Mr. Vincenti.

[00:09:54] Speaker 02:
Ms.

[00:09:54] Speaker 02:
Haber.

[00:09:58] Speaker 02:
Good morning, and may it please the Court.

[00:10:00] Speaker 00:
In the red brief at 6, the PTO contends that TTAB, quote, rejected well-leaving labs on it, putting that in arguments.

[00:10:12] Speaker 00:
that the proposed mark is suggestive or incongruous because, I'm quoting you, the mark requires no imagination or mental pause on the part of consumers to understand the nature of the services.

[00:10:25] Speaker 00:
But the TTAB is lacking in that affirmative analysis.

[00:10:31] Speaker 00:
The quote I read from the TTAB's decision appears to be nothing more than its initial summary of well-living labs arguments.

[00:10:40] Speaker 00:
Where is the, in the decision, TTAB decision, is there an affirmative analysis of potential suggestiveness?

[00:10:49] Speaker 02:
Well, I think, Your Honor, it's certainly at the end when they analyze the MARC as a whole well-living lab, and they say it conveys no more than the sum of its individual parts.

[00:10:59] Speaker 02:
It immediately informs consumers of applicant scientific research and product testing services about our future characteristic of those services.

[00:11:07] Speaker 02:
And there,

[00:11:08] Speaker 02:
They are rejecting the notion that it's suggestive, incongruous, a double entendre, or any of that.

[00:11:14] Speaker 02:
And that's correct, because there's only one legally significant meaning of well-living and of well-living labs in this case.

[00:11:22] Speaker 00:
If Helen makes much of what the board... But they look at the somewhat archaic meaning, so it's not the only one.

[00:11:30] Speaker 00:
It's just that they weigh it.

[00:11:31] Speaker 02:
Well, so, Your Honor, let's look at what they did there.

[00:11:33] Speaker 02:
It says that APPX6.

[00:11:35] Speaker 02:
They're analyzing and trying to figure out, what do we do with this archaic definition?

[00:11:40] Speaker 02:
How does it factor in here?

[00:11:42] Speaker 02:
And they're assessing overall here, what is the meaning of well living as a definitional matter?

[00:11:48] Speaker 02:
And all they say is, OK, somewhat archaic means some people may still be aware.

[00:11:58] Speaker 02:
That is not the same as a finding that consumers

[00:12:02] Speaker 02:
Have that meaning in mind when they're encountering the mark.

[00:12:06] Speaker 00:
Don't talk one at a time.

[00:12:07] Speaker 00:
You're opposing counsel overspoking the self.

[00:12:10] Speaker 02:
Correct.

[00:12:10] Speaker 02:
Yes.

[00:12:12] Speaker 02:
It's just acknowledging some consumers may still be aware it's not the same as finding that meaning is readily apparent when encountering this mark for these services, which involve human health and wellness.

[00:12:24] Speaker 03:
And the board also gave that definition some weight, right?

[00:12:30] Speaker 02:
Didn't say we would give this some weight.

[00:12:32] Speaker 02:
They considered it, but I think in reaching a conclusion as to what the finding, I should say, and what the meaning of well-living is, we have to look at what it means today because registration is always assessed at the time the application is pending on the record of public perception today.

[00:12:49] Speaker 03:
What about the argument that you should look at well-living, even if it had multiple different meanings?

[00:12:56] Speaker 03:
When you put well-living with lab, is that in any way more descriptive of what the services are when you put the two together?

[00:13:04] Speaker 02:
Yes, Your Honor.

[00:13:05] Speaker 02:
That directs you to the health and wellness meaning.

[00:13:07] Speaker 02:
That's the legally relevant meaning here, because terms can have multiple dictionary definitions, and they can mean things in other contexts.

[00:13:17] Speaker 02:
What we care about for descriptiveness

[00:13:19] Speaker 02:
is if it has a meaning in the particular context of the services at issue, that's the relevant meaning and that is the meaning here.

[00:13:25] Speaker 02:
All of the evidence of third party use shows that it's referred to, they're referring to well living as a healthy life, as wellness, wellness programs for well living.

[00:13:38] Speaker 02:
And when you combine that with

[00:13:41] Speaker 02:
lab for these services that relate to research in the field of human health and wellness, you have the human health and wellness meaning is directly descriptive of these services.

[00:13:52] Speaker 02:
And that's the meaning that consumers would perceive, because as Judge Wallach pointed out, consumers know what the services are.

[00:14:00] Speaker 02:
They know it's a lab that conducts research in the field of human health and wellness.

[00:14:03] Speaker 02:
What's the meaning of well-living to them?

[00:14:05] Speaker 02:
This record shows it's healthy.

[00:14:07] Speaker 02:
It's the health meaning.

[00:14:08] Speaker 00:
I want to interject that the reason I said

[00:14:11] Speaker 00:
your friend over spoke is because it says may as opposed to are.

[00:14:19] Speaker 02:
Yes.

[00:14:22] Speaker 02:
And just to explain sort of the situations where two meanings will take you out of a descriptiveness finding is very rare.

[00:14:31] Speaker 02:
A true double entendre is a very rare scenario.

[00:14:34] Speaker 02:
And it only happens in a case where both

[00:14:36] Speaker 02:
meanings are readily apparent, and both meanings have to be well recognized.

[00:14:42] Speaker 02:
The board did not find here that the virtuous life meaning of well living is well recognized, or that it would be the meaning that consumers have when they're encountering these services.

[00:14:52] Speaker 00:
The suggestion I gave, while somewhat facetious, if there was a catchment device for children falling into wells, that would be a true double entendre.

[00:15:02] Speaker 02:
That could be if those were the goods.

[00:15:04] Speaker 02:
I think, yes, that's probably true, because the health meaning wouldn't really be the meaning that applies there.

[00:15:13] Speaker 02:
But a case like Sugar and Spice, the Colonial Stores case, that was a situation where the nursery rhyme, common, well-known, well-recognized nursery rhyme, meaning it had an independent meaning of the constituent elements.

[00:15:29] Speaker 02:
And that was a double entendre case.

[00:15:31] Speaker 02:
But normally, if it's two possible meanings, we're not, it's very hard to get around descriptiveness unless you can show that those meanings are both apparent.

[00:15:40] Speaker 02:
So the Cinch case, that was the NRAE K2 Corp case, not a precedent of the board.

[00:15:46] Speaker 02:
But that is an example of where the record had two definitions, both of which were equally plausible in the minds of consumers.

[00:15:56] Speaker 02:
One was tightening, it was snow, snowboard bindings were the goods there.

[00:16:00] Speaker 02:
So CINCH meant to tighten, and that was the examining attorney's evidence.

[00:16:05] Speaker 02:
CINCH also meant easy to use.

[00:16:08] Speaker 02:
But there was no evidence that the easy to use meaning, and the examining attorney didn't contend that the easy to use meaning, was merely descriptive there.

[00:16:15] Speaker 02:
So the board expressed doubt.

[00:16:16] Speaker 02:
They said, we're not convinced it's merely descriptive because we have these two equally relevant meanings for these goods that consumers would appreciate.

[00:16:24] Speaker 02:
That's not this case.

[00:16:25] Speaker 02:
There's only one meaning, and it's merely descriptive.

[00:16:28] Speaker 03:
What about the suggestion that sometimes it can mean financial issues or other things other than health in the trademarks that the TTAB referred to, like on Appendix Page 7?

[00:16:46] Speaker 02:
Well, I think that there, again, we have to look at what the services are here.

[00:16:54] Speaker 02:
And they say human health and wellness.

[00:16:56] Speaker 02:
And those examples, even the one that talks about financial matters, it talks about health, fitness, and nutrition.

[00:17:03] Speaker 02:
And to the point that I think what counsel may have been arguing is that well-living is a vague term because it could be all these different kinds of health.

[00:17:13] Speaker 02:
They're all human health.

[00:17:14] Speaker 02:
That's what their identification of goods reads, human health.

[00:17:18] Speaker 02:
We have to have specific identifications that people understand.

[00:17:21] Speaker 02:
We all know that health involves several parts of

[00:17:25] Speaker 02:
fitness, diet, nutrition, but that doesn't mean it's not merely descriptive.

[00:17:28] Speaker 02:
We know what health encompasses and that it's just one aspect of human health.

[00:17:33] Speaker 02:
Their services encompass all aspects of human health.

[00:17:39] Speaker 02:
The court has no further questions.

[00:17:43] Speaker 04:
Okay.

[00:17:43] Speaker 04:
Thank you.

[00:17:49] Speaker 04:
Mr. Insanti.

[00:17:50] Speaker 01:
Thank you, Your Honor.

[00:17:51] Speaker 01:
Just a few short points.

[00:17:52] Speaker 01:
I'd like to address the first point, Your Honor.

[00:17:55] Speaker 01:
Well, all of it, but that's one of the issues.

[00:18:02] Speaker 01:
First of all, the decision does not say some people recognize the dictionary definition.

[00:18:08] Speaker 01:
It says some consumers.

[00:18:11] Speaker 01:
What other consumers are we talking about in the analysis here?

[00:18:15] Speaker 01:
We're talking about, and what the board is talking about,

[00:18:18] Speaker 01:
is consumers of my client's services.

[00:18:21] Speaker 01:
That can be the only thing.

[00:18:22] Speaker 01:
No, it may be aware.

[00:18:23] Speaker 01:
It may be aware.

[00:18:24] Speaker 01:
And I think as counsel just acknowledged.

[00:18:26] Speaker 01:
You're taking it as R. Yes.

[00:18:28] Speaker 01:
But as counsel just acknowledged, in the Sinch case, some consumers may.

[00:18:34] Speaker 01:
The issue is doubt.

[00:18:35] Speaker 01:
May.

[00:18:36] Speaker 01:
If some consumers may recognize that definition, that's doubt.

[00:18:41] Speaker 01:
And that means it's not singularly and merely.

[00:18:44] Speaker 00:
Supposing it said no consumers may be aware.

[00:18:47] Speaker 01:
If it says, if the finding was, we do not see that any consumers would recognize this definition.

[00:18:54] Speaker 00:
No, but might is different.

[00:18:55] Speaker 01:
Might is different.

[00:18:56] Speaker 00:
May and might are the same thing in this use.

[00:19:00] Speaker 01:
It's not permissive.

[00:19:01] Speaker 01:
Yes, but your honor, I think again, the legal definition of merely descriptive is merely and only descriptive, not just suggestive of the services.

[00:19:10] Speaker 01:
And with no mental leap and no imagination, the consumer goes exactly to the specific services

[00:19:16] Speaker 01:
from the descriptive definition.

[00:19:17] Speaker 01:
And I think the board's decision there means that it's not merely descriptive.

[00:19:22] Speaker 01:
They refer to consumers, and they do say may.

[00:19:24] Speaker 01:
And that's doubt.

[00:19:25] Speaker 01:
And as in the cinch case, that's sufficient, I would think, to make it suggestive.

[00:19:30] Speaker 01:
Any doubts go in favor of the applicant here.

[00:19:35] Speaker 01:
The second point, Your Honor, in terms of the definition.

[00:19:37] Speaker 01:
So the definition in my client's application is product testing and scientific research

[00:19:44] Speaker 01:
for indoor environments regarding human health, product testing for human health.

[00:19:50] Speaker 01:
Even taking that decision, accepting that decision of the board, that looking at the examples the examiner submitted, health means a lot of things.

[00:20:00] Speaker 01:
And the board itself decided that in ORIC.

[00:20:03] Speaker 01:
The issue and the mark in that case was healthy home.

[00:20:07] Speaker 01:
The product was HEPA vacuums.

[00:20:10] Speaker 01:
And the board found health means a variety of things.

[00:20:14] Speaker 01:
It's aspirational.

[00:20:15] Speaker 01:
It could be human health.

[00:20:16] Speaker 01:
It could be environmental health.

[00:20:18] Speaker 01:
It could be a number of things.

[00:20:20] Speaker 01:
And I think that's where we are here.

[00:20:22] Speaker 01:
I think that's where this case fits.

[00:20:24] Speaker 01:
And I think that's what the driven innovations case is.

[00:20:28] Speaker 01:
So the labs you're referring to is the dogs in the house who are living well.

[00:20:33] Speaker 01:
Your Honor, I think lab also makes it even less descriptive.

[00:20:37] Speaker 01:
What is a well-living lab?

[00:20:38] Speaker 01:
What does that mean to a consumer?

[00:20:40] Speaker 01:
It's not well-living product testing.

[00:20:43] Speaker 01:
What's a well-living lab?

[00:20:44] Speaker 01:
Or it's not product testing lab.

[00:20:47] Speaker 01:
I think the examiner's position here and the director's position is a little too stringent when talking about the merely descriptive test.

[00:20:58] Speaker 01:
So that's the point.

[00:20:59] Speaker 01:
In that oral case, they're saying health means a lot of things.

[00:21:01] Speaker 01:
It cuts across a wide variety of different meanings that the consumer's going to have to parse through, and they will not make immediate leaps.

[00:21:08] Speaker 01:
They're going to have to use their imagination.

[00:21:11] Speaker 01:
Lastly, I want to stress the dictionary definition again, the adjective, which includes comfortable life in later use.

[00:21:19] Speaker 01:
Comfortable life is totally different than health and wellness.

[00:21:23] Speaker 01:
And I think it's reasonable to say, okay, I test my products and I can have a comfortable life or I have a comfortable philosophy.

[00:21:30] Speaker 01:
I think that's entirely reasonable.

[00:21:33] Speaker 01:
And simply to say, well, we're going to reject that because the somewhat archaic notation goes with the noun, which is a different definition.

[00:21:40] Speaker 01:
I think that was clear error, Your Honor.

[00:21:42] Speaker 01:
We respectfully submit.

[00:21:44] Speaker 01:
And that means this case should be reversed.

[00:21:48] Speaker 01:
Unless there's any questions, Your Honor, I have no, nothing further.

[00:21:51] Speaker 04:
Thank you very much.