Etavrian
keyboard_arrow_right Created with Sketch.
News
keyboard_arrow_right Created with Sketch.

USPTO issues final refusals for Managed and Hosted WordPress trademarks - what reconsideration could change

Reviewed:
Andrii Daniv
2
min read
Aug 28, 2025
Minimalist tech illustration of trademark dossier with final refusal stamp toggle off reconsideration shield funnel

The United States Patent and Trademark Office issued final refusals for two WordPress Foundation trademark applications covering "Managed WordPress" and "Hosted WordPress." The foundation has filed Requests for Reconsideration after Final Action.

WordPress Trademark Applications Rejected By USPTO
Final refusals issued for "Managed WordPress" and "Hosted WordPress."

WordPress Trademark Applications Rejected By USPTO

USPTO examiners issued Final Office actions refusing registration of the marks after ongoing examination. The actions outline issues that must be resolved before registration can proceed. The refusals are reflected in the applications' records in the Trademark Status and Document Retrieval system (TSDR).

  • Applicant: WordPress Foundation
  • Marks: "Managed WordPress" and "Hosted WordPress"
  • Action type: Final Office actions refusing registration
  • "Hosted WordPress" issues include a disclaimer requirement, identification of goods and services, and domicile information
  • For "Managed WordPress," the USPTO requires a disclaimer of the word "Managed"
  • Examiners requested clarification on whether "website development software" is downloadable (Class 9) or provided online (Class 42)
  • Office actions suggest acceptable identification language drawn from the ID Manual
  • Requests for Reconsideration after Final Action have been filed for both applications

What the Reconsideration Means

A Request for Reconsideration asks the USPTO to revisit a Final Office action based on amendments, arguments, or evidence. If refusals are maintained after reconsideration, the applicant can appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB).

Background Context

  • A final Office action follows an earlier nonfinal action when issues remain unresolved
  • Disclaimers are required for terms that are merely descriptive of the goods or services
  • Identification wording must align with the correct Nice classes - Class 9 often covers downloadable software, while Class 42 covers software provided online
  • Applicants must maintain a current domicile address with the USPTO, and foreign-domiciled applicants must be represented by a U.S.-licensed attorney
  • USPTO rules call for clear, nontechnical identification wording, and examiners often propose acceptable language drawn from the ID Manual

For filing and procedural guidance, see the USPTO's Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure and the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS).

Sources

Quickly summarize and get insighs with: 
Author
Etavrian AI
Etavrian AI is developed by Andrii Daniv to produce and optimize content for etavrian.com website.
Reviewed
Andrew Daniv, Andrii Daniv
Andrii Daniv
Andrii Daniv is the founder and owner of Etavrian, a performance-driven agency specializing in PPC and SEO services for B2B and e‑commerce businesses.
Quickly summarize and get insighs with: 
Table of contents