The company behind a collection of popular woven handbags is pushing back against the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (“USPTO”) refusal to register its signature woven pattern. In the response that it filed with the USPTO last week, Entrelaced Holdings LLC, which does business as NAGHEDI (hereinafter, “NAGHEDI”), took issue with the trademark office’s preliminary refusal to register its neoprene weave pattern. The New York-based company argues that despite the USPTO’s claim that the woven pattern is “merely an ornamental and/or nondistinctive feature of the goods” upon which it appears (namely, handbags), the pattern actually serves as a clear source identifier of its products, and as a result, it functions as a trademark.
According to its October 10 response to the USPTO’s office action, as first reported by TFL, NAGHEDI is challenging the USPTO’s preliminary refusal to register its trademark, which consists of a “configuration of slim, uniformly-sized straps of neoprene interlaced, folded and woven to form a repeating weave pattern covering the surface of the goods, or a portion of the surface of the goods.” The basis for the USPTO’s examiner’s refusal: the repeating weave pattern would be perceived by consumers as “an ornamental and/or nondistinctive feature of the goods” – and not an indicator of source – “because highly similar if not the same patterns are commonly used on the same or similar goods.”
The Case for Distinctiveness
Looking to side step a more final refusal from the USPTO, NAGHEDI argues that its weave pattern is not just an ornamental feature but a unique design that functions as a trademark. Citing precedent from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (In re Corning Glass Works and In re Paramount Pictures Corp.), counsel for NAGHEDI maintains that a design can be both ornamental and source-indicating at the same time. A design that “has ornamental value may, nevertheless, be registered if it also functions as a trademark,” the company asserts in its filing.
NAGHEDI also draws parallels between its mark and those of other well-known brands that have successfully registered repeating patterns as trademarks, including Louis Vuitton’s Epi pattern, Bottega Veneta’s intrecciato weave, Victoria’s Secret two-tone pink mark, and a multi-hued stripe mark from Rowing Blazers, among others.

The company states that like Louis Vuitton’s Epi leather pattern, for which the French luxury goods giant maintains a trademark registration (on the Principal Register), its weave mark is “inherently distinctive, acts as a source identifier,” and is eligible for registration.
Use and Recognition
While NAGHEDI says that it “believes its [woven pattern] mark is inherently distinctive,” it can also meet the standard for acquired distinctiveness, as its mark has become associated with a single source over time due to its consistent use in commerce. Highlighting the various factors that are used to gauge whether a mark has acquired distinctiveness (or amassed secondary meaning in the minds of consumers), the company states that it “has continuously and exclusively used the mark in commerce” for more than a decade, arguing that such long-term and exclusive use has made the mark a recognized symbol for its products.
Specifically, NAGHEDI maintains that the mark has been used across “handbags, purses, tote bags, reusable shopping bags, shoulder bags, weekender bags, clutch bags, crossbody bags, cosmetic bags, and pouches” for years and has generated rising sales. For example, NAGHEDI asserts that in 2021, it “had over six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) in sales and, just three years later, it projects over sixteen million dollars ($16,000,000) in sales for 2024.”
In a nod to an additional factor (i.e., the amount and manner of advertising), NAGHEDI states that it has invested heavily in marketing and advertising, spending over $2.5 million in 2023 and 2024, alone, to promote its products, all of which include the woven pattern at issue. Moreover, through a robust social media presence, NAGHEDI alleges that it is able to reach “a wide audience to market and promote its goods,” reaching “millions of consumers each year.”
Still yet, NAGHEDI highlights how its products have been featured in prominent fashion publications, further establishing the distinctiveness of the mark. “Products bearing the mark are regularly featured and/or reviewed in and by mainstream fashion magazines and blogs,” and celebrities like Jessica Alba, Jennifer Lawrence, and Gisele Bündchen, as well as well-known fashion industry influencers, have been spotted with the brand’s bags, helping to elevate its visibility.
TLDR: “As a result of this long-term use and the substantial promotion and marketing of the mark, which has resulted in significant sales figures for goods bearing the mark, the mark has come to exclusively identify goods originating from [NAGHEDI], creating the same commercial impression across all uses.”
Intentional Copying
The company goes on to point to instances of “intentional copying” by competitors as further evidence of the mark’s distinctiveness. In its response, NAGHEDI states that “there have been many instances of intentional copying and the sale of knock-off handbags that copy the mark’s distinctive pattern,” and the company has taken steps to enforce its rights, including by sending “numerous cease-and-desist letters” to alleged infringers. NAGHEDI argues that the presence of knock-off products “bears silent testament to public demand” for its design, reinforcing that consumers recognize and associate the woven pattern with the NAGHEDI brand.
Addressing the USPTO’s Concerns
In its April office action, the USPTO raised concerns about the swatch-type drawing used in the application, questioning whether it was appropriate for a repeating pattern applied across different products. The trademark body suggested that the mark might constitute multiple marks, rather than a single one, because of the way the pattern is applied. NAGHEDI countered this in its filing, arguing that the pattern creates a consistent “commercial impression” across all of its products, whether used on handbags, clutches, or pouches. The company argued that the swatch-type drawing should be accepted, as it accurately reflects the mark’s use on a variety of goods while maintaining the same source-identifying function. The response asserts that NAGHEDI “meets prong two of the two-part test for registrability of a swatch-type drawing because the trademark is perceived as a source indicator and creates the same commercial impression across all uses.”
The USPTO also requested additional information about the design and its manufacturing process, and in its response, the company clarifies that the neoprene used in the mark is an integral part of the product’s distinct look and feel, stating, “[the use of neoprene in [NAGHEDI’s] goods favors the look and feel of the goods, which are distinct from the look and feel of goods made of other materials, for example, similar goods made of leather, vegan leather, cotton, or polyester.”
THE BIGGER PICTURE: The USPTO’s preliminary refusal to register NAGHEDI’s woven mark echoes past challenges faced by brands, such as Bottega Veneta, whose own signature woven pattern was initially refused registration by the USPTO. Bottega Veneta overcame the refusal and secured a trademark registration for its intrecciato weave in 2014, but the refusal of NAGHEDI’s mark, nonetheless, raises questions about the strength of similar trademarks in the fashion industry. The examining attorney’s assertion that woven patterns are “commonly used” on handbags – and thus, may not serve as source identifiers – could have implications for the broader market.
If NAGHEDI’s pattern is deemed nondistinctive, it might invite scrutiny of other similar marks, potentially affecting the legal standing of brands like Bottega Veneta.