News & Analysis as of

Reversal Appeals Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

McDermott Will & Schulte

Kissing cousins? SUNKIST and KIST deemed confusingly similar

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

BakerHostetler

Federal Circuit Reverses TTAB Decision Based on Dissimilar House Marks

BakerHostetler on

On June 13, the Federal Circuit reversed the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB or Board) nonprecedential decision finding no likelihood of confusion between opposer Château Lynch-Bages’ and applicant Château Angélus...more

Erise IP

What’s Trending in Trademarks, August 2024: What Constitutes an Abandoned Mark? How Famous is Cognac?

Erise IP on

Every month, Erise’s trademark attorneys review the latest developments at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, in the courts, and across the corporate world to bring you the stories that you should know about: Fourth...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

Federal Circuit Reverses Rifle Patent Interpretation That Missed the Mark

On January 14, in Evolusion Concepts, Inc. v. HOC Events, Inc. (consolidated with Evolusion Concepts, Inc. v. Juggernaut Tactical, Inc.), the Federal Circuit emphasized that claim terms should be given their ordinary meaning...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

MarkIt to Market® - April 2020: Color Marks for Product Packaging CAN Be Inherently Distinctive - What This Means for Your Brand...

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential ruling on the question of whether a color mark for product packaging can ever be inherently distinctive, holding that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB)...more

Akerman LLP - Marks, Works & Secrets

Supreme Court Holds Ban on Immoral or Scandalous Trademarks Unconstitutional

On June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court, in Iancu v. Brunetti, reviewing the trademark application for “FUCT”, held that the Lanham’s Act’s provision, prohibiting the registration of “immoral[] or scandalous”...more

ArentFox Schiff

Supreme Court Rules Ban on ‘Immoral or Scandalous’ Trademarks Unconstitutional

ArentFox Schiff on

On Monday, the Supreme Court held that the ban on “immoral or scandalous” trademarks was unconstitutional under the First Amendment. The Court found that, as with the recently struck down ban on “disparaging” marks, the ban...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

SCOTUS on Swearing: Lanham Act Violates First Amendment by Prohibiting Registration of Immoral or Scandalous Trademarks

Ballard Spahr LLP on

The Supreme Court unanimously held on June 24, 2019, that the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering “immoral” trademarks with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) infringes upon the First Amendment because such a...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

US Supreme Court Strikes Down Ban of ‘Scandalous’ Trademarks

On June 24, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, in a 6-3 decision in Iancu v. Brunetti, 588 U.S. ____ (2019), that Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act’s ban on the registration of “immoral” or “scandalous” trademarks violates the...more

International Lawyers Network

Federal Circuit Reminds Us That Extrinsic Considerations Are Narrowly Construed in Trademark Matters

2018 saw a number of important trademark cases decided across the United States. Two cases illustrated the similarities between genericness analysis and one of the likelihood of confusion factors considered by the Trademark...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

This was a busy week for precedential cases at the Circuit. In AIA v. Avid, the Circuit rules that there is no right to a jury trial as to requests for attorney fees under § 285. In Romag v. Fossil, a majority rules that the...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

Fish & Richardson

Rare TTAB §2(d) Reversal Where Examiner Failed to Heed Rules of Evidence

Fish & Richardson on

While browsing back issues of the indispensable Allen’s Trademark Digest, the blurb for the Trademark Trial & Appeal Board’s decision in the appeal In re Micros Systems, Inc. caught my eye. It was a rarely-seen reversal of an...more

Knobbe Martens

Trademark Review | September 2015

Knobbe Martens on

The TTAB Finds Confusion Between WINEBUD Wine and BUD Beer The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) found that Applicant’s mark WINEBUD for wine is confusingly similar to Anheuser-Busch’s (“AB”) BUD mark. The TTAB...more

Knobbe Martens

Trademark Review | August 2015

Knobbe Martens on

The Redskins Lose Again (Off the Field)- A federal District Court affirmed the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s (TTAB) ruling that “Redskins” cannot be registered as a trademark for use in connection with a...more

15 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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide