News & Analysis as of

Appeals › Reversal › Trademark Application

McDermott Will & Schulte

Kissing cousins? SUNKIST and KIST deemed confusingly similar

McDermott Will & Schulte on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a Trademark Trial & Appeal Board decision, concluding that there was a likelihood of confusion between the marks KIST and SUNKIST when used in connection with soft...more

International Lawyers Network

When appealing bears fruit: Pear Technologies v EUIPO – Apple

International Lawyers Network on

Are apples different from pears? Or are they both just fruit? Or, as cockney rhyming slang would have it, are they stairs? These are the questions (excepting the last one) that the distinguished judges of the Court of Justice...more

Smart & Biggar

Year-end Round-up: Notable Trademark Case Law From 2018

Smart & Biggar on

There were many interesting trademark cases coming out of 2018, a few of which are discussed below. The scope of Canada’s anti-dilution remedy (section 22 of the Trademarks Act) is not limited to a defendant’s use of a...more

Knobbe Martens

More Than Zero: Under the Lanham Act, One Interstate Sale Qualifies as Actual Use of a Trademark in Commerce

Knobbe Martens on

In 2009, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office rejected shoe manufacturer Adidas’s application to trademark the phrase “ADIZERO,” due to a likelihood of confusion with an existing mark: “ADD A ZERO,” a clothing trademark held...more

4 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide