The U.S. Supreme Court has struck down the U.S.P.T.O.’s long-standing ban on the registration of trademarks comprising “scandalous” and/or “immoral” trademarks (read here). Petitioner Erik Brunetti has tried to register the mark F-U-C-T for a clothing line and claimed that the mark should be pronounced as four letters, one after the other. For obvious reasons, […]
The USPTO has issued a new examination guide with the weighty title “Examination of Marks for Cannabis and Cannabis-Related Goods and Services after Enactment of the 2018 Farm Bill.” Unfortunately, what many had hoped would be an opening for marijuana marks turns out to be a very narrow one indeed. Put briefly, the USPTO has […]
Patent infringement has long been subject to a special venue (site of litigation) statute, 28 U.S.C. 1400. Unlike general venue statutes which concentrate on where an injury took place, the nature of the parties, and convenience of the parties and courts; Section 1400 is very specific. It allows patent infringement suits only where “the defendant […]
A recent Ohio Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals case, based on some convoluted facts and possibly misguided in its outcome, nonetheless illustrates some very important business realities on the intersection of trade names and trademarks in Ohio. Wooster Floral & Gifts, LLC v. Green Thumb Floral & Garden Ctr., Inc., 2019 Ohio 63. Kimberly Gantz […]
This Spring the Supreme Court will decide whether the mark FUCT, along with a reversed swastika, should be registered on the Principal Register as a U.S. trademark for a clothing line. The Court recently decided, in Matal v. Tam, 137 S. Ct. 1744 (2017) that the long standing trademark office policy against “scandalous or immoral” […]
