The New York Intellectual Property Association will host a seminar entitled "Hot Topics in Intellectual Property Law" on Wednesday July 20, 2016, from noon to 5 PM, at the Princeton ...
Professor McCarthy responds below to the comments on this TTABlog post regarding his criticism of the TTAB's dilution analysis. I don’t agree with the commenters who argue that the T.T.A.B. ...
I once heard a TTAB judge say that the outcome of most Section 2(d) likelihood of confusion cases can be predicted just by looking at the marks and the identified ...
The Board affirmed a Section 2(e)(1) refusal of the mark BEST PROTEIN, finding it merely descriptive of "dietary and nutritional supplements" [PROTEIN DISCLAIMED]. Applicant BPI Sports asserted that some imagination ...
The Board affirmed a Section 2(a) refusal of the mark SEAL TEAM PHYSICAL TRAINING, INC., in the stylized form shown below, for "consulting services in the field of fitness and ...
Today in The Medicines Co. v. Hospira, Inc., __ F.3d __(Fed. Cir. July 11, 2016)(O’Malley, J.)(en banc), a unanimous twelve member Federal Circuit ruled on whether a supply agreement created ...
The Board issued a 98-page opinion in this consolidated opposition and cancellation proceeding, commenced in 2003, involving Defendant's marks 1.0, 1.25, 1.5, and 2.0, in standard character and/or design forms, ...
Professor J. Thomas McCarthy has been a consistent critic of the TTAB's analysis in dilution cases, particularly the Board's failure to properly consider the issue of "impairment" or "damage" arising ...
The USPTO refused registration of the mark CARUSO HOTELS AND RESORTS for "hotel and resort services" [HOTELS AND RESORTS disclaimed], finding the mark to be primarily merely a surname under ...
In the SEXSTROLOGY case that I blogged yesterday, the TTAB had this to say (at page 14) about the Supplemental Register: 1. According to the Board, Section 23 of the ...