This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Simply calling A S LIVE FOREVER a brand cannot transform an otherwise unregistrable designation into a registrablemark." See Mayweather , 2020 WL 6689736, at *3.
In a "somewhat unusual" Section 2(d) cancellation proceeding targeting a Supplemental Register registration and involving "dueling claims of acquired distinctiveness," the Board granted a petition for cancellation of Fieldvine's Inc's registration for the mark PERMITS.COM for construction permit services.
In this appeal from final refusals issued in two expungement proceedings, the Board affirmed the USPTO Director's decision to cancel registrations for the mark SMARTLOCK , in standard character and design form, for "Components for air conditioning and cooling systems, namely, evaporative air coolers." Examining Attorney Laura E.
35: TTAB Grants MIRAGE BRANDS Cancellation Petition Due To Likelihood of Reverse Confusion On Remand from the CAFC, TTAB Denies Petition for Cancellation of "NAKED" Registration for Condoms TTABlog Test: Three Recent Section 2(d) Inter Partes Cases - How Did They Come Out? [Yes] Precedential No. Lack of Bona Fide Intent: Precedential No.
Introduction A mark represents the institution or company to which it belongs and serves as a means of differentiating goods or services among individuals. Marks can be of various types i.e., word marks, servicemarks, logos, symbols, series marks, etc [1]. Lal Babu Priyadarshi [9]. 1999, July 26).
Here are three recent TTAB rulings, each sustaining an opposition based upon non-use of the opposed servicemark. For a servicemark, the services must be rendered in order to qualify as "use in commerce" as defined in Section 45 of the Lanham Act. PayNearMe, Inc. Substring, LLC , Opposition No.
Per the Complaint, Plaintiffs have used the getGo® trademark since at least March 2013 and have sought and secured federal trademark registrations for various getGo® trademarks and logos as set forth below (the “getGo® Marks”). Registration No. ServiceMarkRegistrations, Nos.
Many film titles or names like Dhoom (ID: 1319835), Padman (ID: 3749859), 3 Idiots (ID: 1940729), and Singham (ID: 3672533), have been registered as a servicemark under class 41, of the fourth schedule of the Trademark Rule, 2001. These registrations aid in allocating precedence. The case of “ Anil Kapoor Film Co Pvt Ltd v.
Sections 1 and 2 provide for registration of "trademark[s] by which goods of the applicant may be distinguished from the goods of others." Section 3 states that servicemarks are registrable "in the same manner and with the same effect as trademarks." are not registrable." Team Jesus , 2020 USPQ2d 11489, at *18-19.
The Board observed that, as made clear by the Trademark Act, the USPTO "is statutorily constrained to register matter on the Principal Register if and only if it functions as a mark." See , e.g. , In re Texas With Love, LLC , 2020 USPQ2d 11290, at *2 (TTAB 2020). In re Brunetti , 2022 USPQ3d 764, at *9. The Board disagreed.
–Penn State Football @PennStateFball on 12/7/2020. Here in a nutshell is the query the Court addressed: 16 Under Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001, trade marks which are devoid of any distinctive character shall not be registered. . –Kat Eschner, The Story of Hollywood’s Most Famous Lion (2017).
The first is a recent decision of the Australian Federal Court in Manly Warringah Cabs (Trading) Co-operative Limited v Sydney Taxis Pty Ltd, in the matter of Sydney Taxis Pty Ltd (No 2) [2020] FCA 1336. In August 2020, a provisional liquidator was appointed to Sydney Taxis on the application of Manly Cabs. 0800 Blossoms Ltd.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content