Legal 500

  • Rankings

    • Jurisdictions
    • Submissions
    • Future Lawyers

  • Firms & Lawyers

    • Service Providers
    • Barristers’ Sets
    • Networks
    • Interview with…

  • In-House

    • In-House Content
    • GC Powerlist

  • Knowledge Centre

    • Data Products
    • Legal Business
    • News & Developments

    • About us

      • Legal 500
      • FAQs
      • Marketing
      • Careers
      • Contact us
  • Comparative Guides
  • Events
  • Legal 500 TV

About us

  • Legal 500
  • FAQs
  • Marketing
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Deutschland DE
  • Paris FR

  • Rankings

    • Jurisdictions
    • Submissions
    • Future Lawyers

  • Firms & Lawyers

    • Service Providers
    • Barristers’ Sets
    • Networks
    • Interview with…

  • In-House

    • In-House Content
    • GC Powerlist

  • Knowledge Centre

    • Data Products
    • Legal Business
    • News & Developments

    • About us

      • Legal 500
      • FAQs
      • Marketing
      • Careers
      • Contact us
  • Comparative Guides
  • Events
  • Legal 500 TV

About us

  • Legal 500
  • FAQs
  • Marketing
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Deutschland DE
  • Paris FR

© 2026 Legalease Ltd. All rights reserved

Registered company in England & Wales No. 02427356 VAT GB 321 5727 22

Registered address: 188 Fleet Street, London, EC4A 2AG

  • Data Protection policies
  • Cookies Policy
  • Supplier Code of Conduct
  • Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking Statement
  • Contact Us
  • home
  • Market Intelligence
  • Search

Your search for ‘Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.’ returned 1,716 results

Use advanced search filters to refine your search

Advanced search filters

Topics
Countries
Contributor

Start typing to add contributors

Content type
Show options
  • Article

    Federal Circuit Report: What Is The Key To Unlocking The Federal Circuit's Divided Infringement Test?

    In Travel Sentry Inc. v. Tropp, 877 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2017), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit shed some light on how to apply the divided infringe
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    Hulu v. Sound View: The PTAB Sets New Precedent On How To Prove A Reference Is A Printed Publication

    Invalidity grounds in IPR that are not based on patents must be based on printed publications. But the nature of the evidence required at the time of institution to show that a non-patent reference is a printed publication...
    United StatesIntellectual Property
Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    Is "SMART TECH" Merely Descriptive Of RFID-Controlled Model Trains?

    The USPTO refused to register the proposed mark SMART TECH for "downloadable software for controlling RFID enabled electronic toy and model trains, toy and model train sets, and components...
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    ITC v. PTAB: Is Winning In IPR Enough To Avoid An ITC Exclusion Order?

    Parties accused of patent infringement often turn to IPRs to invalidate the asserted patents, and winning in an IPR can mean relief from whatever remedy would be imposed as a consequence of a finding of infringement.
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    Precedential No. 22: TTAB Allows Withdrawal Of Cancellation Petition Prior To Answer, Without Prejudice, Despite Federal Court Ruling Adverse To Petitioner

    Petitioner Jim Beam filed a voluntary withdrawal, without prejudice, of its petition for cancellation of a registration for the mark shown immediately below, for "distilled spirits."...
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    Precedential No. 32: TTAB Defers Decision On Motion To Strike Testimony Declaration

    In this consolidated proceeding concerning the mark LEHMAN BROTHERS, Tiger Lily Ventures Ltd. moved to strike certain testimony and evidence submitted by Barclays Capital Inc. during the latter's case-in-chief...
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    TTABlog Test: Is NUB GLOVE Merely Descriptive Of Bowling Gloves, Balls, And Hole-Drilling Services?

    The USPTO refused to register the mark NUB GLOVE for "Bowling gloves and bowling balls
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    WYHA? TTAB Affirms Refusal Of Prevention Chain For Swine Disease Prevention Services: Specimens Failed To Show Use As A Mark

    The Board affirmed a refusal to register the purported mark PREVENTION CHAIN for educational and informational services concerning
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    TTABlog Test: How Did These Three Recent Section 2(d) Appeals Turn Out?

    It's a new year and a clean slate. Here are the first three decisions of the year in Section 2(d) appeals. How do you think they came out? [Results in first comment].
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    AMERICAN VETERINARY NURSES ASSOCIATION Geographically Descriptive Of Veterinary Services, Says TTAB

    The Board affirmed a Section 2(e)(2) refusal of the mark AMERICAN VETERINARY NURSES ASSOCIATION, finding it to be primarily geographically descriptive of "veterinary medicine services.
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    E.D. Va. Dismisses Bayer's Section 43(a) Claims But Affirms TTAB's Cancellation Of Belmora's FLANAX Registration

    When we last visited (here) the long-running Bayer versus Belmora battle over the mark FLANAX, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit had reversed and remanded the case to the U.S. District
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    Precedential No. 3: TTAB Rejects Applicant's Express Abandonment Of Application "Without Prejudice" After Adverse Final Decision

    In the shortest precedential decision in recent memory, the Board rejected this applicant's attempt to expressly abandon its application "without prejudice" after the Board had issued a...
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    THE TROPICS For Restaurant Services Confusable With TROPIXX For Nightclub Services, Says TTAB

    In a bit of a snoozer, the Board affirmed Section 2(d) refusals of the mark THE TROPICS for "providing foods and drinks; providing of food and drink via a mobile truck; restaurant...
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    TTAB Reverses Disclaimer Requirement: ANAHEIM Not Geographically Descriptive Of Clothing

    The TTAB reversed a refusal based on the USPTO's requirement, under Section 6(a), that Applicant Red Flags Fly disclaim the word ANAHEIM in its mark ANAHEIM HILLBILLIES
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    TTAB Test: Is The Design/Stylization Of This USA SUPPLEMENTS Mark Inherently Distinctive?

    This patriotic applicant sought registration of the word+design mark shown below for "dietary and nutritional supplements" [USA SUPPLEMENTS disclaimed].
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    TTAB Test: Which Of These Three Section 2(d) Refusal Was/Were Reversed?

    On April 15th, the TTAB the appeals from the three Section 2(d) likelihood of confusion refusals summarized below. At least one of the three refusals was reversed. Let's see how you do in divining the results.
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    TTAB Test: Which Of These Three Section 2(d) Refusals Was Reversed?

    It has been said that one can predict the outcome of a Section 2(d) appeal 95% of the time just by looking at the marks and the goods or services
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    TTABlog Test: How Did These Three Section 2(d) Appeals Come Out?

    Here are three recent decisions in appeals from Section 2(d) refusals.
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    TTABlog Test: Which Of These Three Disclaimer Requirements Was/Were Reversed?

    Under Section 6(a) of the Trademark Act, "[t]he Director may require the applicant to disclaim an unregistrable component of a mark otherwise registrable."
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
  • Article

    TTABlog Test: Which One Of These Three Section 2(d) Refusals Was Reversed?

    So far this year, the TTAB has affirmed 177 of the 190 Section 2(d) refusals on appeal (about 93%).
    United StatesIntellectual Property
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
    Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.

    • Showing 581–600 of 1716 results

    PreviousNext
    Legal Intelligence Newsletters