In a December 2017 decision the Board granted, in part, petitioner's motion for summary judgment [here] and ordered cancellation of a Supplemental Registration for the phrase MORE PROTEIN THAN SUGAR! in standard ...
In this rather quixotic appeal, the CAFC upheld the TTAB's decision of August 2, 2016 [TTABlogged here], dismissing two oppositions to registration of the mark SCHLAFLY for beer. The opposers, Dr. Bruce S. ...
In yet another precedential decision dealing with the January 2017 rule changes, the Board rejected Opposer Asustek's motion for reconsideration of an order denying its motion to compel discovery responses ...
Here are three recent Board decisions in Section 2(d) oppositions. I'm not giving any hints this time, so you're on your own. How do you think these cases turned out? ...
On remand from the CAFC, the TTAB sustained these two (consolidated) oppositions, finding the mark EARNHARDT COLLECTION for "furniture" and "custom construction of homes" to be primarily merely a surname under Section ...
The USPTO refused registration of the mark RICHARD RAWLINGS' GARAGE for "Headgear, namely, hats, caps, bandanas and beanies; Hooded pullovers; Hooded sweatshirts; Jackets; Pullovers; Sweatshirts; T-shirts; Tank Tops; Socks; Underwear; all of ...
The USPTO refused registration of the mark ATHLETE INTELLIGENCE, in standard character form, for wearable monitoring devices and systems. Applicant argued that the mark is merely suggestive of the goods because ...
In this concurrent use proceeding, the Board ordered restriction of a registration for the mark GREENFIELD for various healthcare services, to the state of Oregon. Applicant successfully sought concurrent use registrations for ...
The USPTO refused registration of the mark SONIA for "sauces; chili sauce; hot sauce," finding a likelihood of confusion with the registered mark SONIA SONI LIFE IS A RECIPE for ...
Here are three recently decided Section 2(d) cases: one opposition and two appeals. See if you can "guess" how they came out. [Answer in first comment]. In re I.L.L.A. S.P.A., ...