Songs For Littles, LLC, the company behind Ms. Rachel, paid $2,400 on May 27, 2026 to ask the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board to cancel the LIL HERBIE SERIES registration. The USPTO had cited that registration against three HERBIE applications for the show’s orange puppet. Registrant Sherrikka Myers says her mark never went unused. One character name now has two children’s brands on opposite sides of a TTAB docket.
Three HERBIE Applications Are Stalled Behind One Registration
The petition opened Cancellation No. 92091794 and asks the Board to cancel Registration No. 6,572,144 across all four of its classes. The current status is visible in the pending USPTO cancellation record.
The two characters look nothing alike on paper. Songs For Littles describes Ms. Rachel’s Herbie as a recurring orange puppet. Every 1 Voice Matters, the organization behind Myers’ character, presents Lil Herbie as a youth-focused mascot who appears in books, animated content, a doll, digital products, school assemblies, and community programs.
The petition explains why Songs For Littles filed. Its HERBIE word-mark application, Serial No. 98/501,045, was filed April 15, 2024. Two design applications showing the orange monster with HERBIE below followed on January 30, 2025. The petition and its attached USPTO records show final Section 2(d) refusals against the two design applications on December 8, 2025 and against the word mark on February 28, 2026, each citing the LIL HERBIE SERIES registration. TTABVUE now identifies all three applications as suspended.
Myers answered on July 27, 2026. She denies abandonment and states that she has made bona fide use of LIL HERBIE SERIES for every good identified in the registration.
Then the story moved outside the docket. Ms. Rachel told TMZ on September 8, 2026 that the parties had discussed coexistence and planned to work together in some way. As of September 14, 2026, TTABVUE still shows the cancellation as pending, with no settlement filing, suspension for settlement, dismissal, or decision after the answer.
An Abandonment Claim Requires Proof of Nonuse and Intent
Songs For Littles pleads abandonment under Section 14(3) of the Trademark Act, which allows a petition to cancel at any time when a registered mark has been abandoned. The definition comes from 15 U.S.C. § 1127. Abandonment through discontinued use has two elements: the owner stopped using the mark, and the owner had no intent to resume. The statute lets the Board infer intent from the circumstances.
The three-year rule shapes how each side builds its case. Proof of three consecutive years of nonuse is prima facie evidence of abandonment. That presumption shifts the burden of producing contrary evidence to the registrant, but Songs For Littles must still persuade the Board, by a preponderance of the evidence, that abandonment happened. The dispute over the TWITTER mark shows how a three-year nonuse claim shapes an abandonment fight at a much larger scale.
The petition alleges that Myers made no qualifying use of LIL HERBIE SERIES for at least three consecutive years and had no intent to resume. The answer denies both points and asserts bona fide use for every registered good. Neither document proves anything yet; the petition attaches USPTO status records, not sales evidence, and the answer attaches no exhibits.
The current Every 1 Voice Matters website complicates the picture without settling it. Its present promotion of Lil Herbie products and programs belongs in the evidence, but it shows activity today, not sales or service delivery across the three years the petition names.
The registration separately covers educational apps in Class 9, books and learning materials in Class 16, clothing in Class 25, and educational and entertainment services in Class 41. When I read a docket like this, I look for dated records tied to each class, because evidence that supports one category may not establish use across the full registration.
Whatever the Board decides, its power stops at the registration. The TTAB can keep or cancel a federal registration, but it cannot order Myers to stop using Lil Herbie or award damages. Even a cancellation would not guarantee approval of the three HERBIE applications, because other requirements or refusals could still stand in the way.
Character Brands Stretch Across Shows, Books, Toys, and Clothing
The visual difference is obvious. Ms. Rachel’s Herbie is an orange puppet in a blue shirt. Lil Herbie is presented as an African American mascot tied to social-emotional learning and youth programs. Both characters, though, carry HERBIE as the name a child or parent will repeat, search for, and ask for.
The commercial fields overlap far more than the drawings do. Songs For Littles is asking for HERBIE across books, toys, clothing, digital media, streaming, household goods, live appearances, and related services. Lay those categories over the four classes Myers already holds and the two brands meet in books, clothing, apps, and education or entertainment programs.
Both sites make the reach concrete. The Ms. Rachel catalog lists four Herbie-branded toys. Every 1 Voice Matters promotes five Lil Herbie books, an affirmation doll, animated videos, digital learning materials, and school assemblies. Neither brand is confined to a screen.
That reach is why the name carries trademark weight. A character name identifies the source of a show, a toy line, an app, a book series, or a live program whenever consumers encounter it as a brand. The artwork may raise separate copyright questions, but when a character name or image serves as a trademark depends on how the public uses the name to find and choose a product.
Section 2(d) follows that logic. The USPTO can find a conflict based on the similarity of the marks and the relatedness of the goods or services, and nothing in that test requires the characters to look alike. Brands with distinct drawings and missions can still block each other when the wording is close and the products sit on the same shelf or in the same app store.
Expansion turns a manageable overlap into a collision. A character that starts inside a show or a book rarely stays there; it becomes a plush toy, a licensing asset, a live event, a classroom program. Categories that once seemed separate arrive through the same retailers, streaming platforms, and search results.
That is the backdrop for the reported talks. Ms. Rachel’s September 8 coexistence comments suggest a business solution is on the table, but no public terms define who could use HERBIE, in which formats, with what visual presentation, or under what expansion limits.
Clear the Name Before the Character Becomes a Product Line
The cheapest moment to test a character name is before anyone draws it. Once a puppet has a voice, a book has a cover, and a toy has a mold, a rename costs real money and goodwill.
The search comes first. I check federal registrations and pending applications for the exact character name, spelling variants, soundalikes, shortened forms, series names, and design elements that could create a similar commercial impression. A review of what a search should test before filing covers ground a quick database lookup misses.
The USPTO database is only half the search. Character names live in books, video channels, app stores, toy listings, school programs, events, crowdfunding pages, and social profiles, and uses protected only by state registration or common law can still support an opposition or cancellation later.
Then map the expansion plan before choosing classes. Separate the use that exists today from the credible next steps: books, plush toys, clothing, downloads, streaming, licensing, live appearances. The growth pattern in the HERBIE dispute is common, and the class list should reflect where the brand is going, not only where it started.
Word and design protection do different jobs. A word mark follows a name across artwork that changes over time, while a design application protects the specific look of the character with its wording. Many brands need both, and each application still has to clear earlier registrations on its own.
Proof of use has to be built from launch, class by class. Keep dated product pages, packaging, invoices, shipment records, advertising, service dates, attendance records, licensing agreements, and quality-control records that connect the mark to actual commerce. After registration, audit the record: remove goods or services the business no longer supports, track maintenance deadlines, and document any temporary pause and the plan to resume.
If coexistence with another brand is on the table, write the boundaries down. A workable agreement addresses names, logos, character appearance, goods, services, channels, age groups, geography, online discovery, licensing, future expansion, enforcement, and what happens if either side sells the brand.
Finally, set a go or no-go point, and set it before artwork, inventory, licensing deals, and publicity make a rename too expensive to consider.
Solve Character-Name Conflicts Before Launch
The HERBIE dispute shows how a character name can look available in one medium and still hit an earlier registration once the brand expands into books, toys, clothing, apps, or entertainment services. Three applications sit suspended while a cancellation case is pending. Any creator building a character faces the same decision point before the first public commitment.
I help creators and businesses evaluate a character name before that point. My office reviews federal records and current market use, maps the goods and services a brand will grow into, and advises on clearance searches, word and design applications, portfolio cleanup, evidence planning, coexistence terms, and responses to refusals or registration challenges. I handle that work personally for each client.
If you are naming a character, planning a product line around one, or facing a refusal or a registration dispute, contact my office before the next public or financial commitment. Test the name while a rename is still a decision rather than a loss.
