When a Stylized Letter Isn’t Enough – What Trademark “Mutilation” Really Means


June 2, 2025

Hello Reader,

When you apply for a trademark, one of the things the USPTO checks is whether your drawing matches how you actually use the mark. If it doesn’t—especially if you’ve carved out just a piece of the full brand name—you might get hit with a refusal for “mutilation.”

Yes, that’s a real trademark term. And it just tripped up a pharmaceutical company.

In In re Verrica Pharmaceuticals Inc., the company applied to register a stylized "V" with three dots above it, claiming it as a standalone trademark. But on their packaging and website, that “V” was part of the word VERRICA.

The USPTO refused the registration. The TTAB agreed.

Why?

Because the stylized “V” was not separate enough from the rest of the word.
🔸 There wasn’t enough spacing between the V and the letters “ERRICA”
🔸 The V didn’t appear by itself anywhere on the packaging or website
🔸 Even though the V was stylized and colored differently, it still functioned as the first letter of the full brand name

The Board explained: “Consumers will immediately understand the word to be ‘VERRICA’ with a stylized V as the first letter. Only looking at the V would require that we cast a blind eye on the rest of the word.”

That’s what trademark law calls mutilation—trying to register only part of a mark that isn’t perceived by the public as standing on its own.

Key Takeaways:

Consistency is critical – If you want to register a single element (like a letter or design), you must actually use it that way—as a standalone source indicator.

Spacing matters – If the element is part of a wordmark, it must be visually and conceptually distinct from the rest.

Style ≠ separability – Just because something looks different doesn’t mean it functions separately in the eyes of consumers.

Use what you file – Your drawing must be a “substantially exact” match of the mark as shown in your specimens.

The Bottom Line

If you’re trying to carve out a stylized element of your logo or wordmark for separate protection, be strategic—and make sure it’s being used that way in real life. Otherwise, you may end up with a rejection, and a wasted filing.

Keep Your Brand Safe and Protected,

J.J. Lee and the Trademark Lawyer Law Firm Team!

P.S. If you’ve ever wondered whether a stylized letter, icon, or part of your logo is registrable on its own, let’s take a closer look—before the USPTO tells you it’s been “mutilated.”

J.J. Lee, Trademark Attorney

Learn something new every Thursday! Join over 4,000 entrepreneurs and business owners for weekly Trademark tips, tricks, and news.

Read more from J.J. Lee, Trademark Attorney
Brick building entrance framed by lush greenery.

July 14, 2025 TMtelegram Hello Reader, Most people know that trademarks protect your brand name, but did you know that famous trademarks get a higher level of protection under the law? Two recent cases show exactly how that works—and how powerful a famous trademark can be in court. Case #1: The IVY LEAGUE Stops “IV League Nurse Concierge” The Ivy League colleges (like Harvard and Yale) collectively own the trademark THE IVY LEAGUE, and they've used it for decades in connection with education,...

Applying lip gloss to lips.

July 7, 2025 TMtelegram Hello Reader, You might think leather purses and cosmetics have nothing to do with each other. But when the same trademark is used for both, the USPTO says: there’s a real chance of confusion. That’s exactly what happened in a recent case where Huella Studio LLC tried to register the mark HUELLA (which means “fingerprint” in Spanish) for high-end leather goods. But the mark was already registered by someone else—for cosmetics and nail products. Even though the products...

Two bright cosmic objects are connected in darkness.

June 30, 2025 TMtelegram Hello Reader, In May 2025, the Federal Circuit upheld the USPTO’s refusal to register the mark US SPACE FORCE—but not for the reason most people expect. The issue wasn’t likelihood of confusion. It was something else: false suggestion of a connection. This refusal falls under Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, which bars registration of any mark that falsely suggests a link with: A person (living or dead) An institution A belief or A national symbol In this case, the...