Edom labs inc v lichter 102 u s p q 2d 1434 ttab 2012
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 21

Edom Labs., Inc. v. Lichter , 102 U.S.P.Q.2d 1434 (TTAB 2012) PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 98 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Edom Labs., Inc. v. Lichter , 102 U.S.P.Q.2d 1434 (TTAB 2012). 1. CHIRO-KLENZ v. SUPER CHIRO. “FROM THE ORIGINAL MAKERS OF CHIRO-KLENZ” …. 2. But I Already Own The Mark!. In re Strategic Partners, Inc., 102 U.S.P.Q.2d 1397 (TTAB 2012). ANYWEARS. The 13 th duPont Factor. ANYWEARS.

Download Presentation

Edom Labs., Inc. v. Lichter , 102 U.S.P.Q.2d 1434 (TTAB 2012)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Edom labs inc v lichter 102 u s p q 2d 1434 ttab 2012

Edom Labs., Inc. v. Lichter, 102 U.S.P.Q.2d 1434 (TTAB 2012)

1


Chiro klenz v super chiro

CHIRO-KLENZ v. SUPER CHIRO

“FROM THE ORIGINAL MAKERS OF CHIRO-KLENZ”…

2


But i already own the mark

But I Already Own The Mark!

In re Strategic Partners, Inc.,

102 U.S.P.Q.2d 1397 (TTAB 2012)

ANYWEARS


The 13 th dupont factor

The 13thduPont Factor

ANYWEARS

“Any other established fact probative of the effect of use.”

S


Dilution cases

Dilution Cases

NASDAQ v. NASDAQ (sporting goods & clothing) – 2003

The Other White Meat v. The Other Red Meat (salmon) – 2010

[Nike] Just Do It v. Just Jesu It (clothing) – 2011

Motown v. Motown Metal (toy vehicles) - 2011

5


Lack of dilution coach v coach

Lack of Dilution: Coach v. Coach

Coach Services Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC,

668 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2012)

6


Dilution blackberry v crackberry

Dilution:Blackberry v. Crackberry

Research in Motion Ltd. v. Defining Presence Mktg. Group and Axel Ltd. Inc.,102 U.S.P.Q.2d 1187 (TTAB 2012)

7


Federal registration defense

Federal Registration Defense

Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences v. Alliance of Professionals & Consultants, Inc.,

104 U.S.P.Q.2d 1234 (TTAB 2012)

8


Federal registration defense1

Federal Registration Defense

Section 1125(c)(6) – Ownership of a federal registration is a complete bar to any action:

(A)(i) [now (A)] is brought by another person under the common law or a statute of a State; and

(ii) [now (B)(i)] seeks to prevent dilution by blurring or dilution by tarnishment; or

(B) [now (B)(ii)] asserts any claim of actual or likely damage or harm to the distinctiveness or reputation of a mark, label, or form of advertisement.

9


Distinctiveness spectrum

Distinctiveness Spectrum


Merely descriptive section 2 e

Merely Descriptive – Section 2(e)

  • SNAP

  • SNAP SIMPLY SAFER; and

  • For medical syringes and needles

Duopross Meditech v. Inviro Medical,

685 F.3d 1046, 103 U.S.P.Q.2d 1753 (Fed. Cir. 2012)


Merely descriptive vs suggestive

Merely Descriptive vs. Suggestive

Duopross Meditech v. Inviro Medical,

685 F.3d 1046, 103 U.S.P.Q.2d 1753 (Fed. Cir. 2012)

  • Forthwith conveys an immediate idea of the ingredients, qualities, or characteristics of the goods

  • Requires imagination, thought, and perception to reach a conclusion about the nature of the goods


Merely descriptive vs suggestive1

Merely Descriptive vs. Suggestive

Duopross Meditech v. Inviro Medical,

685 F.3d 1046, 103 U.S.P.Q.2d 1753 (Fed. Cir. 2012)

  • May ascertain the meaning and weight of each component

  • Must consider the mark as a whole

  • Must consider the mark in relation to the goods


Edom labs inc v lichter 102 u s p q 2d 1434 ttab 2012

Duopross Meditech v. Inviro Medical,

685 F.3d 1046, 103 U.S.P.Q.2d 1753 (Fed. Cir. 2012)


Merely descriptive vs suggestive2

Merely Descriptive vs. Suggestive

Duopross Meditech v. Inviro Medical,

685 F.3d 1046, 103 U.S.P.Q.2d 1753 (Fed. Cir. 2012)

  • Self-laudatory and puffing marks are regarded as descriptive

  • SNAP SIMPLY SAFER - lauds the safety of the products


Generic vs merely descriptive

Generic vs. Merely Descriptive

In re Tennis Industry Association, 102 U.S.P.Q.2d 1671 (TTAB 2012)


Edom labs inc v lichter 102 u s p q 2d 1434 ttab 2012

Baroness Small Estates v. American Wine Trade, 104 U.S.P.Q.2d 1224 (TTAB 2012)

“A Blend of

Cabernets -

Merlot - Syrah”


Stylizations apart from words

Stylizations Apart From Words

In re Sadoru Group, Ltd.,

__ U.S.P.Q.2d ____ (TTAB 2012)


Acronyms initialisms and japanese calligraphy

Acronyms, Initialisms And Japanese Calligraphy


  • Login