On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court in Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc., limited the extraterritorial reach of the Lanham Act. The majority opinion was written by Justice Alito and joined by Justices...more
On June 8, 2023, the Supreme Court unanimously decided the trademark parody case captioned Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC in favor of Jack Daniel’s, and against the dog toy manufacturer and serial parodist...more
6/21/2023
/ Dilution ,
First Amendment ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Jack Daniels Properties Inc v VIP Products LLC ,
Lanham Act ,
Likelihood of Confusion ,
Parody ,
Rogers Test ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks
On March 31, 2023, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc., where at issue is whether the Tenth Circuit erred in applying the Lanham Act extraterritorially to Abitron’s...more
In Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc., Oklahoma-based Hetronic, maker of radio remote controls for heavy-duty construction equipment, sued its former distributor Abitron (from Austria) for selling copycat...more
4/17/2023
/ Abitron Austria GmbH v Hetronic International Inc ,
Extraterritoriality Rules ,
Foreign Sales ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Lanham Act ,
Oral Argument ,
Petition for Writ of Certiorari ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks
On March 22, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in the trademark parody case captioned Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC. As we previously blogged, the issues presented in the care are:
...more
3/28/2023
/ Beverage Manufacturers ,
Brand ,
Dilution ,
First Amendment ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Lanham Act ,
Likelihood of Confusion ,
Oral Argument ,
Retail Market ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks ,
Wine & Alcohol
On November 21, 2022, the Supreme Court granted certiorari on the following questions described in Jack Daniel’s petition:
Respondent VIP Products LLC markets and sells dog toys that trade on the brand recognition of...more
1/20/2023
/ Beverage Manufacturers ,
Certiorari ,
Dilution ,
First Amendment ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Lanham Act ,
Likelihood of Confusion ,
Retail Market ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks ,
Wine & Alcohol
On September 17, 2021, the Third Circuit held in Beasley v. Howard that trademark cancellation proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) do not have claim preclusive effect against trademark...more
9/29/2021
/ Fraud ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Issue Preclusion ,
Jurisdiction ,
Lanham Act ,
Music Industry ,
Trademark Cancellation ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Trademarks
On June 30, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court (the “Court”), in an 8-1 decision, affirmed the Fourth Circuit’s holding that “BOOKING.COM” is a protectable trademark, thereby rejecting a sweeping rule that a protectable trademark...more
7/8/2020
/ Acquired Distinctiveness ,
Appeals ,
Booking.com ,
Domain Name Registration ,
Domain Names ,
Generic Marks ,
Lanham Act ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks ,
United States Patent and Trademark Office v Booking.com BV ,
USPTO
The Lanham Act (“Act”) makes it clear that generic terms cannot be registered as trademarks. But can an online business create a protectable trademark by adding a generic top-level domain (e.g., “.com”) to an otherwise...more
5/15/2020
/ Acquired Distinctiveness ,
Appeals ,
Booking.com ,
Certiorari ,
Descriptive Trademarks ,
Domain Name Registration ,
Domain Names ,
Generic Marks ,
gTLD ,
Lanham Act ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Trademarks ,
United States Patent and Trademark Office v Booking.com BV ,
USPTO
In a recent precedential decision concerning the rarely litigated or cited Section 2(b) of the Lanham Act, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board affirmed a refusal to register the service mark...more
On April 23, 2020, the United States Supreme Court held in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Group, Inc., FKA Fossil, Inc., et al., that under the Lanham Act, a plaintiff is not required to show that a defendant willfully...more
5/3/2020
/ § 1125(a) ,
§ 1125(c) ,
Appeals ,
Burden of Proof ,
Charge-Filing Preconditions ,
Compensatory Awards ,
Dilution ,
Lanham Act ,
Lost Profits ,
Remand ,
Remedies ,
Romag Fasteners v Fossil ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks ,
Vacated ,
Willful Infringement
As cannabis products become legal in more and more states, commercial interest grows in protecting the trademarks associated with those products. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has maintained its refusal to...more
3/16/2020
/ Cannabidiol (CBD) oil ,
Cannabis Products ,
Common Law Claims ,
Counterclaims ,
Cross Motions ,
Decriminalization of Marijuana ,
Dietary Supplements ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Lanham Act ,
Marijuana ,
Medical Foods ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Plant Based Products ,
Preemption ,
Preliminary Injunctions ,
Priority Disputes ,
Retail Market ,
Summary Judgment ,
Trademark Application ,
Trademark Cancellation ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks ,
Unfair or Deceptive Trade Practices ,
USPTO
This trademark litigation arises out of a contentious real-estate rivalry in a very wealthy residential community called Royal Palm Yacht & Country Club in Boca Raton, Florida....more
3/5/2020
/ Acquired Distinctiveness ,
Article III ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Lanham Act ,
Likelihood of Confusion ,
Real Estate Brokers ,
Standing ,
Trademark Cancellation ,
Trademark Ownership ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) recently held that AT&T Mobility, LLC (“AT&T”) had sufficient interest in its almost completely moribund CINGULAR name to oppose two pending trademark applications filed by...more
3/3/2020
/ Abandonment ,
Article III ,
AT&T ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Lanham Act ,
Standing ,
Subsidiaries ,
Trademark Application ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Trademarks ,
Wireless Industry ,
Wireless Technology
The American Bar Association (“ABA”) filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in support of the petitioner in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., No. 18-1233....more
12/5/2019
/ American Bar Association (ABA) ,
Amicus Briefs ,
Intellectual Property Owners Association ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
International Trademark Protection ,
Lanham Act ,
Ownership Rules ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Petition for Writ of Certiorari ,
Profits ,
Public Policy ,
SCOTUS ,
Statutory Interpretation ,
Statutory Violations ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks ,
Willful Infringement
In a recent decision on remand from the Federal Circuit, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) rejected Petitioner adidas AG’s (“adidas”) claim that Respondent Christian Faith Fellowship Church (“CFFC”) abandoned its...more
12/2/2019
/ Abandonment ,
Adidas ,
Commerce Clause ,
Fashion Branding ,
Fashion Design ,
Fashion Industry ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Intent to Cancel ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Interstate Commerce ,
Lanham Act ,
Remand ,
Retail Market ,
Trademark Application ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Trademarks ,
Unitary Trademark ,
Use in Commerce ,
USPTO
In June 2019, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Romag Fasteners Inc. v. Fossil Inc., et al., No. 18-1233. As set forth in our previous blog post, Romag Fasteners Inc. (“Romag”) seeks to have the Court...more
11/22/2019
/ Certiorari ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Lanham Act ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Profits ,
Romag Fasteners v Fossil ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks ,
Willful Infringement
In a recent decision concerning the scope of protection for collective membership marks, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board sustained The Pierce-Arrow Society’s opposition to registration of PIERCE-ARROW for “automobiles”...more
9/5/2019
/ Automotive Industry ,
Brand ,
Collective Marks ,
Corporate Branding ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Lanham Act ,
Likelihood of Confusion ,
Luxury Goods ,
Membership Interest ,
Motor Vehicles ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Trademarks
On Friday, June 28, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider whether, in cases where a plaintiff asserts new claims, federal preclusion principles bar a defendant from raising defenses that were not actually litigated...more
7/9/2019
/ Amended Complaints ,
Appeals ,
Certiorari ,
Claim Preclusion ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Issue Preclusion ,
Lanham Act ,
Res Judicata ,
SCOTUS ,
Settlement Agreements ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks ,
Unfair Competition
On Friday, June 28, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to decide the circumstances necessary to support an award of a trademark infringer’s profits under section 35 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a). Romag Fasteners...more
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
7/1/2019
/ Appeals ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
First Amendment ,
Free Speech ,
Iancu v. Brunetti ,
Lanham Act ,
Reaffirmation ,
Reversal ,
Scandalous/Immoral Marks ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Trademarks ,
Viewpoint Discrimination
This blog has followed the evolving judicial views concerning disparaging trademarks, culminating in the Supreme Court’s decision in in Matal v. Tam, 137 S. Ct. 1744 (June 19, 2017)....more
1/8/2019
/ Disparagement ,
Fashion Design ,
Fashion Industry ,
First Amendment ,
Free Speech ,
Lanham Act ,
Matal v Tam ,
Petition for Writ of Certiorari ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently extended First Amendment protections for trademark applications in In re Brunetti, No. 15-1109 (Fed. Cir. December 15, 2017), ruling that Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act’s...more
12/28/2017
/ Appeals ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Disparagement ,
Fashion Design ,
Fashion Industry ,
First Amendment ,
Free Speech ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Lanham Act ,
Matal v Tam ,
Scandalous/Immoral Marks ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO
In a unanimous (albeit fractured) decision written by Justice Alito, the United States Supreme struck down a provision of the Lanham (Trademark) Act barring registration of “disparaging” trademarks, handing a victory to...more
6/21/2017
/ Disparagement ,
First Amendment ,
Football ,
Free Speech ,
Lanham Act ,
Matal v Tam ,
Music Industry ,
NFL ,
Redskins ,
SCOTUS ,
Team Mascots ,
The Slants ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO
The Supreme Court denied review of the 2d Circuit decision on the Stolichnaya trademark....more