Sep
16

Avoiding Trademark and Domain Name Scams

It’s only a matter of time.  If you own a trademark application or registration, at some point, you are going to receive a fraudulent request to make a payment or take some other unnecessary action relating to the trademark or a related domain name.  At first glance, these fraudulent requests may appear legitimate, but they … Continue reading »

Apr
17

The Effect of TTAB Proceedings on Federal Court Litigation

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent trademark decision in B&B Hardware v. Hargis Industries (March 25, 2015) has generated a substantial amount of concern. According to some lawyers, there has been a sea change in the law. They say the Supreme Court’s decision means that, once the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) (the judicial arm … Continue reading »

Apr
10

“Lack of Intent to Use” – An Increasingly Common Weapon in Trademark Cases

The number of successful attacks on trademark applications and registrations based on a “lack of intent to use” has been increasing in recent years. Trademark owners often include as many products and services in their applications as possible, describing their products and services in various ways, and listing assorted products and services related to their … Continue reading »

Sep
03

The Phillies Strike Out At The TTAB

If you are a fan of the Philadelphia Phillies you probably already know it has been a tough season. The team has lost more often than it has won and now the losing streak extends to the TTAB. See the recently published case The Phillies v. Phila. Consol. Holding Corp., T.T.A.B., No. 91199364, decided August … Continue reading »

Jul
02

Trademark Examiners: A Little Consistency Please!

Every lawyer who prosecutes trademarks knows that old adage that every case has to be considered on its own merits. But what do you do when an Examiner decides that a mark is entirely descriptive, and that decision goes against dozens of other marks on the Principal Register in which the legal basis is indistinguishable? … Continue reading »

May
29

Under Armour v. Life Armour: Symbus Defending Another Trademark Bullying Case

Following its recent success in the Livestrong v. Kidstrong trademark opposition (Symbus Blog, February 19, 2013), Symbus has taken on another trademark bullying case, this one involving a trademark opposition filed by athletic clothing giant Under Armour against Symbus client Life Armour. The Under Armour v. Life Armour case is the most recent in a … Continue reading »

Feb
19

Livestrong v. Kidstrong: Symbus Client Kidstrong Prevails in Trademark Bullying Case

We are pleased to report that the Livestrong Foundation has withdrawn its trademark opposition against our client Kidstrong Enterprises. As we previously reported in this space, the Foundation filed an opposition against Kidstrong, alleging that Kidstrong’s application to register the trademark PROSTRONG, which covers dietary beverages, violated its rights in the mark LIVESTRONG. Kidstrong responded … Continue reading »

Feb
01

Is That A Trademark I Hear? TTAB Addresses Issues Raised By Sound Trademarks In Recent Case: In Re Powermat Inc.

While not common, sound trademarks have been registered in the United States on the Principal Register for over fifty years.  The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) website provides examples of sound trademark registrations at : http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/soundmarks/index.jsp .  However, as the TTAB points out in the recent case In Re Powermat, (a copy which … Continue reading »

Jan
10

Meritless Arguments Don’t Pay: $400K+ in Attorney’s Fees Awarded in Recent Trademark Case

Attorney’s fee awards are relatively rare in trademark cases, but when litigants make meritless arguments, attorney’s fees aren’t far behind. Proving, once again, that it doesn’t pay to make meritless arguments, the Middle District of Florida recently awarded Defendant X/Open Company Limited over $400,000 in attorney’s fees and costs as a result of the meritless … Continue reading »

Dec
31

Establishing Internal Corporate IP Policies and Patenting Strategies

Effective internal IP policies encourage the development of new and valuable IP assets, ensure that your company is identifying potentially protectable IP it is creating already, assist with determining what IP to protect, and how, on a rational basis, and reduce litigation risks at all stages of development.

Older posts «