In a landmark First Amendment decision relating to the Lanham (Trademark) Act, the Federal Circuit, en banc, struck down § 2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a), the statutory provision barring registration of...more
In a landmark First Amendment decision relating to the Lanham (Trademark) Act, the Federal Circuit, en banc, struck down § 2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a), the statutory provision barring registration of...more
In a ruling bound to please 15 year-old boys everywhere, the USPTO Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) reversed the Examining Attorney’s refusal to register the trademark NUT SACK DOUBLE BROWN ALE (in standard character...more
11/5/2015
/ Beer ,
Breweries ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Lanham Act ,
Offensive Language ,
Trademark Act ,
Trademark Application ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO ,
Wine & Alcohol ,
Young Lawyers
In The North Face Apparel Corp. v. Sanyang Industry Co., Ltd., Opp. No. 91187593 (September 18, 2015), the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) handed The North Face Apparel Corp. (“The North Face”) significant victories...more
9/30/2015
/ Automotive Industry ,
Fashion Branding ,
Fashion Design ,
Fashion Industry ,
Motion to Amend ,
Retail Market ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Trademarks
The number of successful oppositions against trademark applications based on a claim that the applicant had “no bona fide intent to use” has been increasing in recent years. On September 10, 2015, in Swiss Grill Ltd. v. Wolf...more
This case arose from GS Enterprises, LLC’s (“GS”) opposition to the registration of Juice Generation, Inc.’s (“Juice Generation”) trademark. In finding a likelihood of confusion with GS’s marks, the Board below reasoned that...more
In the most recent ruling in a lengthy and procedurally complex criminal case, a New York trial court dismissed a computer programmer’s criminal conviction under New York’s Unlawful Use of Secret Scientific Material law for...more
7/13/2015
/ Aleynikov ,
Appeals ,
Convictions ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Criminal Prosecution ,
Dismissals ,
Economic Espionage Act ,
Foreign Commerce ,
Goldman Sachs ,
High Frequency Trading ,
Source Code ,
US v Aleynikov ,
Young Lawyers
In Tartell v. South Florida Sinus and Allergy Center, Inc., the Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court’s finding that the plaintiff’s personal name had acquired distinctiveness as a trademark and that the defendant...more
H.J. Heinz Co. (“Heinz”) filed a federal lawsuit recently against Boulder Brands USA (“Boulder”) seeking to vacate and reverse a Trademark Trial and Appeal Board decision finding that Boulder’s SMART BALANCE trademark is not...more
On May 8, 2015, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) issued a resounding blow to trademark applicants who seek to register others’ trademarks as parodies. In New York Yankees Partnership v. IET Products and...more
The Supreme Court issued its second trademark ruling of the term on Tuesday, ruling that federal court decisions on “likelihood of confusion” sometimes can be precluded by earlier rulings about trademark registrability issued...more
The Supreme Court issued its second trademark ruling of the term on Tuesday, ruling that federal court decisions on “likelihood of confusion” sometimes can be precluded by earlier rulings about trademark registrability issued...more
The Second Circuit ruled last week in favor of Plaintiff Marcel Fashion Group Inc. (“Marcel”), vacating the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendant Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. (“Lucky Brand”), which had...more
In Ferring B.V. v. Fera Pharmaceuticals, LLC, the Eastern District of New York was called upon to determine the importance of the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (“TMEP”)...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has settled the long-open question of whether U.S. copyright holders can prevent the importation of gray market products in Tuesday's decision Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 568 U.S. _____, No....more