Expanding on our blog post of January 2, 2024, yet another scam has been brought to our attention—with serious consequences.
The signatory of a client was telephoned by the “Federal Trademark Office,” which requested a...more
A mark that is “primarily merely a surname” cannot be registered on the Principal Register per Section 2(e)(4) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(4). Even though a surname may be rare, in In re Weale Care, LLC, Serial...more
When considering a likelihood of confusion, one might naturally think a mark is registrable that is an antonym (opposite) of a registered mark. This was not the result in In re Sugar Free Specialties, LLC, Serial No. 90706411...more
In many countries, marks such as single letters or numerals are considered nondistinctive. This is not so in the US, which has a very broad definition of what comprises a trademark in 15 U.S.C. Section 1127...more
In two recent decisions, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) made it abundantly clear that attempting to register a mark for ingestibles containing cannabidiol (CBD) likely will be an exercise in futility.
In In...more
If you desire to register a service mark asserting use that is preparatory for the rendering of your services, your application will fail in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Instead, the services must be actually...more
If you are contemplating registering a service mark that primarily benefits your company and not others, don’t bother; it will be refused registration. This issue was recently addressed by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board...more
Recently, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) decided against a petitioner seeking to cancel a registration on the Supplemental Register in SY Custom, Inc. v. The Tailory, LLC, Cancellation No. 92070568 (TTAB Aug. 12,...more
In Perry v. H.J. Heinz Company, et al. (No. 20-30418 5th Cir. April 12, 2021), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit dealt with the issue of whether de minimis use can defeat a claim of trademark abandonment. It...more
There have been a number of recent Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) cases involving phrase marks. In all instances, the phrases have been refused registration not because of descriptiveness or misdescriptiveness of any...more
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”), in a 2-1 vote, held in Australian Therapeutic Supplies Pty., Ltd. v. Naked TM, LLC, Appeal No. 2019-1567 (Fed.Cir. July 27, 2020), that a property interest in a mark is...more
Have you heard of the theory of “trademark neutralization?” It was developed by the European Union (EU) General Court and the European Union Court of Justice (“CJEU”) in 2006 (Case No. C-361/04 (ECJ Jan. 12, 2005)) holding...more
“Trademark” is broadly defined in Section 45 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1127, as “any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof” that identifies and distinguishes goods and indicates source. ...more
In trademark opposition proceedings the affirmative defense of failure to state a claim is commonly pleaded, yet it is often an inappropriate affirmative defense. Other affirmative defenses that are severely limited in...more