Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Section 1071 of the Lanham Act provides parties two options for appealing adverse ex parte decisions from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB). The dissatisfied party may either appeal to the Federal Circuit under Section 1071(a) or to any U.S. district court under Section 1071(b). 15 U.S.C. §1071(a)-(b). Although pursuit of an appeal to the Federal Circuit may under some circumstances prove to be quicker and less expensive, appeals to district courts are becoming increasingly attractive given recent changes in the law and USPTO practice in defending these actions. Based on the authors' recent experience in several such appeals, they can share the following lessons learned.
Although many parties may initially be inclined to bring ex parte appeals in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, because the USPTO is domiciled within that district, such appeals also may be brought in any district court in which the appealing party resides. 28 U.S.C. §1391(e)(1)(C). Assuming the party is a domestic applicant, filing the action in a district court in which the appealing party resides may provide a strategic advantage as the judiciary there may have greater (and ideally positive) familiarity with the appealing party and the designation subject to the appeal. This may prove to be important where the issue on appeal is focused on whether a particular designation is understood by the relevant consuming public to be a trademark — that is where trademark eligibility is being challenged by the USPTO on genericness, descriptiveness and/or failure-to-function grounds.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.