Remove 2015 Remove Intellectual Property Remove Service Mark Remove Trademark
article thumbnail

The TTAB: Service Mark Use Requires More Than Just Preparation

LexBlog IP

On December 10, 2021, the TTAB issued a precedential decision reminding trademark practitioners and applicants that service mark use requires that an applicant actually render the services recited in the trademark application; mere preparation to render the services is insufficient. ” Opinion, at p.

article thumbnail

Actual Use, Not Preparations For Use, Of A Service Mark Is Necessary For The USPTO To Register It

LexBlog IP

If you desire to register a service mark asserting use that is preparatory for the rendering of your services, your application will fail in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Instead, the services must be actually rendered in connection with the mark for a registration to be granted. ” Id.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Eurasia and IP

Biswajit Sarkar Copyright Blog

It was created in 2015. The Eurasian Economic Commission also directs efforts towards adequate, comprehensive research on the possible negative trends concerning trade in intellectual property, in order to develop measures to overcome them together with Member States of the Eurasian Economic Union.

article thumbnail

Beyond the Big Screen: The Legal Odyssey of Film Titles in India

IP and Legal Filings

V RGV Film Factory” [4] , the court rules that a movie title’s eligibility for trademark protection depends on its acquisition of secondary meanings and uniqueness. [5] The shifting nature of cinematic intellectual property is shown by examples such as “Sholay Media and Entertainment v Parag M. Mondaq (Dec.

Cinema 83
article thumbnail

The Third Circuit Limits Preclusive Effect of the TTAB Rulings

LexBlog IP

Howard that trademark cancellation proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) do not have claim preclusive effect against trademark infringement lawsuits in federal district courts because of the TTAB’s limited jurisdiction. 4,170,469 [the “’469 mark”]).