News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
McDermott Will & Emery

Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Lanham Act’s Names Clause

McDermott Will & Emery on

In Vidal v. Elster, a unanimous Supreme Court of the United States reversed the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s decision, holding that the Lanham Act’s names clause does not violate the First Amendment or...more

Troutman Pepper

Supreme Court Upholds Names Clause in Trademark Law, Emphasizing Historical and Traditional Foundations

Troutman Pepper on

In a landmark decision written by Justice Clarence Thomas, the Supreme Court has unanimously upheld the constitutionality of the Lanham Act’s provision that prohibits the registration of trademarks consisting of, or...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

From Rubio's Joke to the Supreme Court: The Journey of 'Trump Too Small' in Vidal v. Elster

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

Does the Lanham Act’s restriction on registration of trademarks that include an individual’s name without the consent of such individual violate the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, even when the mark expresses...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Supreme Court Rejects TRUMP TOO SMALL Trademark

Fox Rothschild LLP on

“TRUMP TOO SMALL”- This is the trademark that Steve Elster has been trying to get registered for the past six years since filing his trademark application all the way back in January 2018, during the Trump presidency. Since...more

Snell & Wilmer

Supreme Court Asked to Clarify Activities that Give Rise to Specific Personal Jurisdiction

Snell & Wilmer on

In Impossible X LLC v. Impossible Foods Inc., Impossible Foods recently filed an opposition to Impossible X’s petition for certiorari, which asks the Supreme Court to decide (1) whether some disputes should require so-called...more

Pillsbury - Internet & Social Media Law Blog

Supreme Court Weighs Whether Refusing to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL Trademark Violates First Amendment

Pillsbury - Internet & Social Media Law Blog on

On November 1, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court engaged in a thought-provoking deliberation concerning the intersection of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and U.S. trademark law, Vidal v. Elster, Supr. Ct. Case No....more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Oral Argument at the Supreme Court Suggests Refusing to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL Trademark Did Not Violate the First Amendment

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Vidal v. Elster this week, which asks whether refusing to register a trademark that criticizes President Trump violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. It seems the...more

Dunlap Bennett & Ludwig PLLC

Could Trump Too Small Shrink Free Speech Rights In The Trademark Application Process?

Dunlap Bennett & Ludwig PLLC on

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on November 1, 2023 for Vidal v. Elster, a case that questions whether an application to register “TRUMP TOO SMALL” as a mark can be refused registration, or whether such a refusal...more

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP

Supreme Court to Examine Free Speech Limits in “TRUMP TOO SMALL” Trademark Case

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP on

The intersection of free speech and private business branding is once again in front of the Supreme Court of the United States. On June 5th, the Supreme Court decided to hear Vidal v. Elster, Case 22-704, an appeal from the...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

SCOTUS To Examine Whether First Amendment “Trumps” Lanham Act

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court continues to show interest in trademark issues with its recent grant of certiorari in another case pitting the Lanham Act against the First Amendment....more

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

MarkIt to Market® - May 2023

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

Thank you for reading the May 2023 issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to Market® newsletter. This month, we discuss Taco Bell's attempt to cancel two TACO TUESDAY trademark registrations, and a precedential TTAB decision...more

WilmerHale

Season Three Trailer

WilmerHale on

We’re pleased to announce that the firm’s podcast, In the Public Interest, will return for a third season! Tune in to hear a preview of what to expect this season from our hosts, WilmerHale Partners John Walsh and Felicia...more

AEON Law

Patent Poetry: Federal Circuit Allows “Trump Too Small” Trademark

AEON Law on

The Federal Circuit has denied a petition for a rehearing of its February decision reversing the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) rejection of registration for the proposed mark “TRUMP TOO SMALL.” In 2018, Steve...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Oh, Fudge. TTAB Finds Curse Word Fails to Function as Trademark

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) denied registration of several US trademark applications for the mark FUCK, even though the applicant had overcome a prohibition on the registration of “immoral or scandalous” trademarks...more

McDermott Will & Emery

TTAB Judicial Appointments are Determined Constitutionally Sound

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing for the first time whether the Supreme Court of the United States’ recent decision in United States v. Arthrex, Inc. also applied to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), the US Court of Appeals for the...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Intellectual Property Bulletin - Spring 2021

Fenwick & West LLP on

In This Issue - Section 230 and the Future of Content Moderation - We analyze Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act—the 1996 law that provides a legal shield for internet providers from content created by their...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Trademark Law Trends To Follow In 2021

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

2020 was a busy year for trademark litigation, with three U.S. Supreme Court decisions and several high-profile lower court cases involving trademark law. But many folks are understandably eager to put 2020 in the rearview...more

Jones Day

JONES DAY TALKS®: Women in IP: 2020 in Review and a Look Toward 2021

Jones Day on

Jones Day's Meredith Wilkes and Anna Raimer discuss 2020's most significant developments in trademark law and preview what's to come in 2021, including possible progress in Washington on the highly anticipated Trademark...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Federal Circuitry

Orders of Interest Roundup, Arthrex Style

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Federal Circuitry on

At Federal Circuitry blog, we like to check in once in a while on what the Federal Circuit is doing in its orders that don’t get posted on the public website. Those orders often offer nuggets about practice at the Federal...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

USPTO Issues Guidance on Examination of Generic.com Terms

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

In June of this year, the US Supreme Court ruled that a proposed mark consisting of the combination of a generic term and a generic top-level domain, like “.com,” is not per se generic. (USPTO v. Booking.com). In response,...more

Proskauer - Minding Your Business

Supreme Court to Weigh in on Constitutionality of Patent and Trial Appeal Board Appointments

Proskauer - Minding Your Business on

The Supreme Court recently granted three petitions for certiorari challenging the Federal Circuit’s holding in Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew that administrative patent judges of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) are...more

Tucker Arensberg, P.C.

SCOTUS Weighs In: Do Two Generic Terms Equal a Trademark?

Tucker Arensberg, P.C. on

On June 30, 2020, the United States Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated decision regarding the trademark application of Booking.com.  In United States Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com, the Court held that a mark...more

McCarter & English, LLP

Book It: Supreme Court Holds Booking.com Is Registrable As A Trademark

McCarter & English, LLP on

How appropriate that the first-ever Supreme Court case to consider whether trademarks used on the internet can be registered should also be the first in which oral argument was conducted remotely. The issue in this historic...more

Rivkin Radler LLP

The Notorious RBG Spits Fire: BOOKING.COM Is Not Generic

Rivkin Radler LLP on

As is often the case, technology develops faster than the law. In that connection, courts are often called upon to apply legislation from yesteryear to technology which, at the time the legislation was passed, would have been...more

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

“Generic.com,” not so generic after all: BOOKING.COM registers a win at Supreme Court

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP on

On June 30, 2020, the US Supreme Court held that a “generic.com” mark (a generic term in combination with “.com”) could be eligible for federal trademark registration, refusing to adopt the US Patent and Trademark Office’s...more

125 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 5
Next »

"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