ArticleTTAB Awards Junior User USA Minus Oregon in GREENFIELD Concurrent Use ProceedingApplicant began use of its marks in 2002 and 2005, more than seven years before registrant filed its application to register.United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleAIPLA CLE Webinar (Dec. 10): Constitutionality Of Protecting Product Designs Both As Design Patents And As Trade DressOn December 10, 2019 from 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM (Eastern Standard Time), the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA)...United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleContinued Uncertainty About Estoppel Highlights The Importance Of Preparing CarefullyChallengers in post-grant proceedings like IPR may not reassert invalidity arguments in court that they "raised or reasonably could have raised" before the PTAB.United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleEarly Opportunity At The PTAB: What Patent Owners Can Learn From Failed AppealsOn September 21, 2023, the Federal Circuit considered an expectation of success argument in the predictable arts as it related to electro-mechanical assemblies.United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleMartha B. Allard Appointed To Trademark Trial And Appeal BoardChief Judge Gerard F. Rogers has announced the appointment of Marth B. Allard as an Administrative Trademark Judge at the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleRecommended Reading: "Fanciful Failures: Keeping Nonsense Marks Off The Trademark Register"In my role as trademark thought follower, I recommend this recent note in the Harvard Law Review, by Grace McLaughlin, entitled "Fanciful Failures: Keeping Nonsense Marks off the Trademark Register...United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleRecommended Reading: Prof. Christine Farley, "The Lost Unfair Competition Law"Professor Christine Farley of American University Washington College of Law, in her article, "The Lost Unfair Competition Law," notes the oft-repeated assertion that trademark law "is but a part of the broader law of unfair competition." United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleRecommended Reading: Prof. Lorelei Ritchie, "What Is 'Likely To Be Confusing' About Trademark Law: Reconsidering The Disparity Between Registration And Use"Former TTAB Judge Lorelei Ritchie, now an Assistant Professor at Southern Illinois University School of Law, has published an article in the American University Law Review, entitled "What is 'Likely to be...United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleRecommended Reading: The Trademark Reporter, May-June 2022 IssueIn addition to Professor Lorelei Ritchie's article, blogged yesterday, the May-June issue of The Trademark Reporter [pdf here] includes an article by Dr. Xiaoren Wang...United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleRecommended Reading: "Trademark Injury In Law And Fact: A Standing Defense To Modern Infringement"Put aside the WYHA?s and the TTABlog Tests. Sink your teeth into this Harvard Law Review note that strikes at the heart of trademark infringement doctrine: "Trademark Injury in Law and ...United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleRecommended Reading: Zerounian And Thiele, "An Introduction To The Trademark Moderization Act"I recommend this article by Raffi Zerounian and Justin Thiele of Hanson Bridgett, LLP, from The Trademark Laywer magazine (Issue 2 2021)...United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleThe Federal Circuit Giveth, And The Federal Circuit Taketh AwayThat is the gist of a recent decision by the court, which permitted an IPR Petitioner to use "general knowledge" to fill in missing claim limitations...United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleThe Federal Circuit Provides a Roadmap for Using Articles in IPRToo often some challenger in IPR declines to use non-patent literature (or "NPL"), such as academic and trade journal articles, because of the effort and risk associated with establishing that the NPL is prior art. United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleThe PTAB's Flexibility In Its Decisions – The Federal Circuit Weighs InOn appeal of a PTAB decision that all claims in a patent on compressing video files were unpatentable, the Federal Circuit clarified two issues...United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleThe Trademark Reporter's 2022 "Annual Review Of U.S. Trademark Cases"The Trademark Reporter has published its latest Annual Review of U.S. Trademark Cases: "The Seventy-Fourth Year of Administration of the Lanham Act of 1946,"...United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleTTAB Posts April 2020 Hearing SchedulingThe Trademark Trial and Appeal Board has scheduled one final hearing for the month of April 2020. For obvious reasons, the hearing will be held by video conference.United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleTTAB Seeks Applicants For Attorney Advisor (Interlocutory Attorney) PositionThe USPTO is seeking applications for the position of Attorney Advisor (and more specifically, Interlocutory Attorney) at the TTAB. United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleTTABlog Test: Is "GOAT GREATEST OF ALL TIME" Merely Descriptive Of Vodka?AAN Holding, LLC. applied to register the mark GOAT GREATEST OF ALL TIME for vodka, but the USPTO refused registration on the ground of Section 2(e)(1) mere descriptiveness. United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleTurn Back The Clock! TTAB Designates 2019 COKE ZERO Decision PrecedentialThe Board has reached back and deemed precedential its May 3, 2019 decision granting Coca-Cola's Rule 2.133...United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
ArticleWhat's Estoppin' You? – Beware The Barriers Of Asserting Judicial EstoppelJudicial estoppel is an equitable doctrine that precludes a party from taking a position in one proceeding that is inconsistent with a position the party took in a previous proceeding.United StatesIntellectual PropertyWolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.