The USPTO 009 International Class category for trademarks, which covers "recorded and downloadable media, computer software", is where every mobile application seeking trademark protection will at the least register. I hope the USPTO realizes how giant this sector already is and how much more it will grow and allow for robust competition. There are literally millions of apps in circulation with millions more to come. Conversely, there are definitely not millions of chemical companies, for example. Is this a safe assumption given the history of how it treated other similar sectors? For example, if a personal finance app can successfully claim a trademark on "pineapple" (in IC-009), is it safe to assume the USPTO would allow a children's game app to claim the same trademark in IC-009 also?
For example, if a personal finance app can successfully claim a trademark on "pineapple" (in IC-009), is it safe to assume the USPTO would allow a children's game app to claim the same trademark in IC-009 also?
One word, straight word only trademarks are rare. There might be two trademarks in the same class that contain the word pineapple, but generally speaking, that protection would only be in conjunction with other words or with stylized scripts or a logo, not simply the word standing alone (unless the trademarks all belonged to the same registrant).
You would need to examine each of the trademarks in the class containing that word and determine:
(1) Are they on the principal registry (which provides full presumptive protection) and
(2) What precisely is the protected trademark.
A trademark of "pineapple grove" in blue cursive writing on the supplemental register, is not the same as "pineapple" without any associated words or appearance, in the principal register.
If there are trademarks in the same class with overlapping words or elements, the question is whether they are confusingly similar or identical. If so, and if the earlier one hasn't expired, and if both seek to be on the principal register, the later applicant should be rejected by the USPTO, and could probably be challenged by the prior applicant.