Latest Posts › USPTO

Share:

New Year, New Trademark Proceedings

This year kicked off with new tools to help brand owners protect and enforce their marks. The use of a trademark in commerce is an important aspect of U.S. trademark law; however, an increasing number of trademark...more

Takeaways from Trademark Law in 2020 and Looking Ahead to 2021

In this White Paper, we share observations on 2020's most significant developments in trademark law. This year, the U.S. Supreme Court penned three opinions concerning what constitutes a protectable trademark, available...more

U.S. Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 Signed Into Law

The Situation: Changes to the Trademark Act were called for due to a Circuit split regarding the standard for injunctive relief in trademark infringement cases and an increase in fraudulent trademark applications and...more

The Sum Is Greater Than Its Parts: U.S. Supreme Court Holds Booking.com Is a Protectable Trademark

A generic.com term may be eligible for trademark protection if consumers perceive the term as a source identifier. The combination of a generic word plus ".com" does not necessarily equal a generic term. Instead, in an 8–1...more

E-File or You'll Have to Refile: Trademark Filings Gone Digital - New USPTO rules make electronic filing mandatory and update...

Statistics from 2018 reveal that .03% of trademark applications were paper filed. As such, effective February 15, 2020, paper trademark filings are no longer an option. The United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO")...more

U.S. Supreme Court: "All the Expenses" Does Not Include Attorney’s Fees - In Peter v. Nantkwest, Inc., the Supreme Court...

The U.S. Supreme Court's recent 9-0 decision in Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., Case No. 18-801, informs strategic cost considerations in appeals challenging adverse decisions issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office...more

Immoral and Scandalous Trademarks Are Registrable

Supreme Court rules that the Lanham Act's statutory bar against registering immoral or scandalous marks violates the First Amendment. On June 24, 2019, in Iancu v. Brunetti, 588 U.S. __ (2019), the U.S. Supreme Court...more

The Price of Success: Fourth Circuit Affirms PTO Award

A party appealing a PTO decision must pay the PT0's expenses regardless of the applicant's success. Booking.com successfully challenged the United States Patent and Trademark Office's ("PTO") refusal to register its mark...more

Fear No Fees: No Payment of PTO Attorneys' Fees for District Court Patent Review

This decision should be a welcome development for patent applicants seeking review. On July 27, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its en banc opinion in NantKwest, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 16-1794...more

Win or Lose: Appellants of PTO Decisions in District Court Must Pay Attorneys' Fees

On June 23, 2017, the Federal Circuit held in NantKwest v. Matal that patent applicants seeking review of a decision from the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO") to the district court must pay the PTO's legal...more

Siding with The Slants: Ban on Disparaging Marks Held Unconstitutional

Asian rock band The Slants is no longer "The Band Who Must Not Be Named," as they titled their most recent album. On June 19, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided Matal v. Tam, striking a provision of the Lanham Act,...more

Use It or Lose It: USPTO to Conduct Post-Registration Trademark Use Audits

Trademark owners take note: Affidavits to renew your U.S. trademark registrations may be getting a closer look. On March 21, 2017, the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") implemented a new rule aimed at...more

13 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