JONES DAY TALKS®: Women in IP: 2020 in Review and a Look Toward 2021
The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated and remanded a district court’s dismissal of a complaint for trade dress infringement and unfair competition, finding that the district court erred in requiring the...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed a district court’s summary judgment grant in a trademark dispute, finding that the district court did not err in concluding that a subset of design elements lacked...more
Product designs often serve as the cornerstone of a brand’s identity, evoking instant recognition and loyalty among consumers. From the iconic silhouette of Coca-Cola’s glass bottle to the distinctive shape of Gibson guitars,...more
In In re Palacio Del Rio Inc (Serial Nos 88412764 and 88437801), the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) has issued an opinion affirming the refusal of two building design mark applications by Palacio Del Rio Inc (PDR) –...more
I. Trade Dress Is Either a Trademark or Service Mark. “Trade dress” functions as either a trademark or service mark. A “trademark” is any word, term, phase, symbol, logo, design, shape, tag line, background, color, scent,...more
Since the inception of the pandemic, “ghost kitchens” - or shared commercial spaces which host multiple restaurant brands only serving food via delivery or takeout - have presented a surprising silver lining for both...more
Most businesses are familiar with the concept of trademarking a word, logo, or slogan that serves as a unique identifier of their goods or services. After all, those are the markers that first come to mind when you think...more
Design patents are often the go-to option for protecting the visual features, or design, of a product. But design patent protection is not always available, such as after the product has been on sale, offered for sale, or...more
In a precedential decision on August 22 2017, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) in In re General Mills IP Holdings II, LLC (Serial 86757390) held that the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to support the...more