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
19: TTAB Affirms Section 2(b) Refusals of Orange County "Unofficial" Insignia Section 2(d) - Likelihood of Confusion: TTABlog Test: Is "MOXIE SCRUBS" & Design Confusable with "MOXIE" for Clothing? [No] 13th DuPont Factor Saves Four "GAIA" Marks For Supplements From Section 2(d) Refusal Precedential No. Abandonment: Precedential No.
The applicant argued that the USPTO's evidence was too limited, but the Board pointed out that "the Examining Attorney need only establish a reasonable predicate that the phrase fails to function as a mark; the Examining Attorney is not required 'to prove to a moral certainty' that the phrase would not be perceived as a source-indicator.
The Board affirmed refusals to register the product design shown below as a trademark for acupressure mats and pillows, and as a servicemark for retail store services featuring those goods, finding that the product shape lacked acquired distinctiveness as a trademark and failed to function as a servicemark.
The Board upheld a refusal to register the proposed mark MADE FOR YOU LAB-GROWN DIAMONDS , in standard character and design form, for 'diamonds; jewelry" [LAB-GROWN DIAMONDS disclaimed], finding that the phrase fails to function as a trademark. 88304005 and 88584338 (February 24, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Michael B.
In the spring and summer of 2022, following the international sanctions imposed upon Russia after its invasion of Ukraine, Russia introduced several landmark changes to its IP law, most notably to patent, trademark and copyright laws. These rules were introduced in the 2021 amendment to Article 1360 of the Civil Code.
91237315 (February 17, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Christen M. become ordained” or “become a minister,” is strong evidence that Applicant’s consumers will perceive “get ordained” not as a servicemark but rather for the commonly understood meaning of the words. Welch 2022. American Marriage Ministries v.
Thus, the changes described below are expected to enter into force in a few weeks, except (iii), which will enter into force in spring 2022. Trade marks The EUIPO Observatory launched an awareness campaign entitled “Risks and Damages Posed by IPR Infringement in Europe”. Kluwer Patent Blog reported on the changes.
The Board found that Applicant's specimen of use "does not reflect that consumers of Applicant's services will perceive [either mark] as trademarks indicating. television entertainment services." 87916944 and 879169481 (August 24, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Peter W. Welch 2022. Serial Nos.
On the other end are brick and mortar stores that sell trademark-infringing items directly to consumers, regardless of whether the stores design or manufacture those items. CafePress * Cafepress Suffers Potentially Significant Trademark Loss for Users’ Uploaded Designs * Life May Be “Rad,” But This Trademark Lawsuit Isn’t–Williams v.
The lawsuit, filed under the Lanham Act and related Indiana state laws, addresses issues of trademark infringement , unfair competition , false designation of origin , and trademark dilution. 6,935,101), which was granted on December 27, 2022. This trademark is used to identify My Markets services, particularly in the food industry.
2, 2022, the Federal Circuit decided In re Vox Populi Registry Ltd. , The Federal Circuit found that substantial evidence supported the Board’s finding that consumers will perceive.SUCKS only as a non-source identifying part of a domain name and not as a servicemark.
2, 2022, the Federal Circuit decided In re Vox Populi Registry Ltd. , The Federal Circuit found that substantial evidence supported the Board’s finding that consumers will perceive.SUCKS only as a non-source identifying part of a domain name and not as a servicemark.
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]. 2022, February 28). 1] Acharya, M.
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." Century Life of Am.,
The pro se applicant argued, without success, that the proposed mark is suggestive rather than merely descriptive because "HUMAN could refer to any number of ambiguous interpretations about the mark, especially if HUMAN is used as a noun." 88526515 (December 15, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Michael B. Welch 2022.
Crowded Field of Third-Party Registrations and Uses Leads to TTAB Reversal of "MATCH STUDIO" Over "MATCH" for Clothing Licensee's Prior Common Law Use Established Priority for "SNORE MD" Mark TTABlog Test: Is "BEDLAM VODKA & Design" for Vodka Confusable With "BEDLAM! & Design" for Beer?
The Board affirmed a refusal to register the proposed mark WE’RE HERE TO HELP WITH YOUR LEGAL NEEDS! finding that the phrase fails to function as a servicemark for "legal services." That opinion had originally been deemed nonprecedential, but at the USPTO's request, the court re-designated it as precedential.
When artificial technologies are utilized for creating innovations, such as employing evolutionary algorithms for antenna design or engaging IBM Watson to produce music, IPR laws become relevant. AI is doing lots of creative work in the fields of animation, web apps, images, music, designing, and various other things. 21-2347 (Fed.
” Scrooge wasn’t the only one who had that idea: a business owner registered ALWAYS CHRISTMAS & Design as a servicemark in 1995 (Registration No. As Ebeneezer Scrooge put it after being visited by the three ghosts: “I will honour Christmas in my heart, and try to keep it all the year.”
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. ” But that is more in the sense of philosophical acknowledgment of the possibility than practical acceptance of very large numbers of sound marks. .”
You can, so long as you are offering goods and/or services under that trademark. For example, if you complete your online store offering downloadable software on January 1, 2022, you may affix the “TM” ( ) symbol the same day. The “SM” (℠) symbol stands for servicemark. “logo”).
e), the CAFC has re-designated as precedential its opinion in In re GO & Associates, LLC , Appeal No. 2022-1961 (Fed. 14, 2023, re-designated as precedential, January 22, 2024). 2022), cert. At the request of the USPTO under Fed. The TMEP is not the law - ed. ]. at 8–9 (quoting In re Elster , 26 F.4th granted sub nom.
In In re GO & Associates, LLC , 2022-1961 (Fed. 13, 2023) , the Federal Circuit affirmed the TTAB’s refusal to register the mark EVERYBODY VS RACISM because it failed to function as a trademark. Isaacs , 2022-1434 (Fed. In Trek Bicycle Corp. The Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (TMEP) § 1202.04
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