In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit clarified the “use in commerce” requirement for trademark applications filed in connection with the provision of a service.
There was good news for those companies that have products with unique designs at the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). The PTO found that the design of a monster truck could be protected and registered as trade dress for the “services” offered by the owner.
In a succinct eight-page opinion, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously last week that trademark “tacking” is a question of fact that should generally be decided by juries.
On January 16, 2015, Sens. Jerry Moran (R-KS) and Mark Warner (D-VA) introduced S. 181 (The Startup Act), which is meant to promote new business formation, especially in the information technology industry.
In a precedential ruling, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the US Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) sustained an opposition by McDonald’s to the mark MCSWEET for pickled gourmet vegetables on the grounds that it infringed on and diluted McDonald’s famous family of “MC” for formative marks.
Arent Fox Intellectual Property partner Alec P. Rosenberg was quoted by Law360 in an article previewing the most closely watched copyright and trademark cases in 2015.
For the first time since 2009, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) of the US Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) has sustained an opposition on the grounds that the applicant committed fraud on the USPTO.
On September 10, 2014, JPT Group, owner of the iconic American fashion brand Bernardo, filed suit in the Southern District of Texas alleging that Old Navy infringed two of Bernardo’s design patents for sandals.
Fourth Circuit in McAirlands Inc. v. Kimberly-Clark Corp. recently held that ownership of a utility patent does not necessarily preclude a claim in trade dress.
On August 20, 2014, Judge Leonard P. Stark issued what appears to be the first order requiring a branded pharmaceutical company to delist a patent from the Food & Drug Administration’s (FDA) Orange Book.
The US Supreme Court recently agreed to consider a seemingly technical trademark question that could have a potentially big impact for brand owners. Specifically, the Supreme Court will consider whether a judge or the jury should decide if two trademarks are “legal equivalents”.
On August 18, 2014, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion sending website owners a clear warning that the onus is on them to put users on notice of the terms of use to which they wish to bind consumers.
In an IP-related story that seems ripped from the headlines of The Onion, a British photographer has claimed exclusive ownership of a Nat Geo-worthy image of a smiling crested black macaque that was shot with his camera during his 2011 trip to Indonesia. The twist? The monkey took the photo.
Currently, the federal circuits are split over the level of deference that should be afforded to findings made by the USPTO’s Trademark Trial & Appeal Board (TTAB) on likelihood of confusion, with the circuit courts applying at least five different standards.