LAIPLALAIPLA
LAIPLALAIPLA
  • About
    • About LAIPLA
    • Ambassador Outreach Program
    • Board of Directors
    • Committees
    • Administration
    • Member Firms and Companies
    • Past Presidents
    • Recent Past Presidents
    • Public Service Award
    • Diversity Fellowship
    • Bylaws
  • Events
  • Membership
  • Sponsorship
  • Contact
  • About
    • About LAIPLA
    • Ambassador Outreach Program
    • Board of Directors
    • Committees
    • Administration
    • Member Firms and Companies
    • Past Presidents
    • Recent Past Presidents
    • Public Service Award
    • Diversity Fellowship
    • Bylaws
  • Events
  • Membership
  • Sponsorship
  • Contact

TTABlog Collection of Section 2(c) “Consent to Register” Cases

May 17, 2019May 30, 2019| in The TTABlog| by John L. Welch
The recent MANIKCHAND decision is one of only seven Sections 2(c) decision discussed at the TTABlog in the last 14 and one-half years. Set out below is a complete list. Note that five of the seven are precedential.

Section 2(c), in pertinent part, bars registration of a mark that “[c]onsists of or comprises a name, portrait, or signature identifying a particular living individual except by his [sic] written consent ….” This provision applies not only to full names but also to shortened names and nicknames, as long as the name identifies a particular living individual.

A consent is required only if the individual bearing the name in the mark will be associated with the mark as used on the goods or services, either because: (1) the person is so well known that the public would reasonably assume a connection between the person and the goods or services; or (2) the individual is publicly connected with the business in which the mark is used.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Precedential No. 10: TTAB Dismisses Rare Section 2(c) Opposition Due to Death of Named Individual

Precedential No. 36: TTAB Gives the Boot to Nike’s Inadequate Section 2(a) and 2(c) Claims

Precedential No. 4: TTAB Affirms 2(a) and 2(c) Refusals of “PRINCESS KATE” and “ROYAL KATE” for Clothing

Precedential No. 12: TTAB Reverses Section 2(c) Refusal of FRANKNDODD for Legislative Information Services

TTAB Affirms Section 2(c) Refusal of MARTIN & WEYRICH ROSSO ALLEGRO for Wine

Presidential No. 44: In Rare Section 2(c) Ruling, TTAB Affirms Refusal of “OBAMA BAHAMA PAJAMAS”

In a Citable Section 2(c) Decision, TTAB Partially Cancels “KRAUSE PUBLICATIONS” Registration

Read comments and post your comment here.

TTABlog comment: If someone tried to register the mark TTABlog PAJAMAS, I would certainly oppose under Section 2(c).

Text Copyright John L. Welch 2019.

IP Blog Categories

  • Announcements
  • Events
  • LAIPLA News
  • The TTABlog
  • Uncategorized
  • Wegner's Top 10
  • Wegner's Writings

Archives

Previous

District Court Rules on Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim in Appeal from TTAB’s “Bullet-Shaped-Antenna” Decision

Next

TTABlog Test: Are Clothing and Jewelry Related Under Section 2(d)?


Since 1934, LAIPLA has been educating and connecting members of the local intellectual property legal community

Pages

About 
Events
Membership
Sponsorship
Contact
Privacy Policy

Search
Contact

LAIPLA
1621 W 25th Street
Box 633
San Pedro, CA 90732
Phone: (323) 285-1654
Fax: ( 310) 878-0517
Email: office@laipla.net

© 2025 Los Angeles Intellectual Property Law Association. All Rights Reserved | Website design by Arclight Digital.