2010 11 recent developments in trademark law - kelly kubasta

! !!!"#"$%&'"(")*+,"$%-&.$&/012",103&415&6$%"))"#%71)&80*+"0%9&415&:"#%.*$&;4<&

!"#"$%&#'%()%*$+#,%-../#0%1$$"2.3%4'25#67%8/.$%9:7%9;<<%

=><?%-@1@%

!"##$%&'%!()*+,*%=>?@ABC@BDDD&

3"))9E37F1-%1G33@))+E#*,&

-./01+%,.%20+1(++%3-04"%5"640,,0789%

o &HI1%&"J"#%&2*"-&K1,"&I1("&*$&).3").I**2&*K&#*$K7-.*$&1$1)9-.-L&

o &HI1%&.-&%I"&-%1$2102&K*0&*("0#*,.$M&1&+0"-7,+%.*$&*K&2.-%.$#%.("$"--&*K&1&0"M.-%"0"2&%012",103L&

o &6$&1&+*-%@&(,$%5*0)2N&"O1#%)9&I*5&I.MI&10"&%I"&")"(1%"2&-%1$2102-&K*0&+0*(.$M&K0172L&

o &'*&9*7&$""2&1#%71)&-1)"-&K*0&P7-"&.$&#*,,"0#"QL&

o &'*&6$%"0$"%&+0.$%@*7%-&#*$-%.%7%"&12,.--.F)"&"(.2"$#"L&

o &6-&%I"0"&1&P$"5Q&%"#I$.R7"&1(1.)1F)"&K*0&(1$R7.-I.$M&-*,"&#9F"0-R71%%"0-L&

-./01+%,.%20+1(++%3-04"%5"640,,0789%

o &S10.*7-&2.)7%.*$&.--7"-T&o &UVW<XXX&&'*"-&%.,.$M&1$2Y*0&)*#1%.*$&,1%%"0&K*0&2.)7%.*$L&

o &Z"#3N&5.))&2.)7%.*$&<S<!&F"&7+I")2&F9&%I"&//V[L&&\Z.$%&]&9"-^&

o &6-&P.2"$%.#1)&*0&$"10)9&.2"$%.#1)Q&-%.))&1&F0.MI%&).$"&07)"L&o &6-&#*$%0.F7%*09&2.)7%.*$&1&)"M.%.,1%"&#17-"&*K&1#%.*$L&

o &6-&1&-.M$._#1$%&,*$"%109&15102&,"0")9&5.-IK7)&%I.$3.$M&K*0&%012",103&*5$"0-L&&\Z.$%&]&$*N&"("$&5.%I*7%&1#%71)&21,1M"-^&

A2"23'(/B%C.D@%E@%A#B2"#0%A2"6%&#.F%G'(/B7%C.D@N&`?&a:8b=2&>B?c&\//V[&=D>D &̂

W103-&.$(*)("2:!

HI1%d-&.$&2.-+7%":!

Opposition to trademark registration!Citigroup, owner of famous mark CITIBANK, opposing various trademark applications including some variation of CAPITAL CITY BANK!

Likelihood of confusion!Dilution by blurring!

HI1%d-&%I"&*7%#*,":!

Opposition was unsuccessful because:!(a)  No substantial likelihood of confusion!(b)  No dilution by blurring!


4.3").I**2&*K&;*$K7-.*$:!Application of du Pont factors (similar to those in AMF v. Sleekcraft)!

Fame of opposer’s mark – YES, mark CITIBANK is famous!Similarity of services – YES, nearly identical!Similarity of trade channels/consumers – YES, presumed identical!Actual confusion – NO, which is meaningful given plentiful opportunities!Similarity of marks – NO, for a few different reasons:!

•  “City Bank” is commonly used (industry use and 3rd party registrations)!•  Geographic - “Capital City … bank” versus “capital … City Bank”!

Balance of Factors – Significant differences outweigh fame of mark CITIBANK!

versus!


'.)7%.*$&F9&[)700.$MT!Timing of Fame:!

In order to succeed on a dilution claim, the alleging party must prove that its mark is famous, and that it was famous prior to the applicant’s use of the mark"Toro Co. v. ToroHead Inc., 61 USPQ2d 1164 (TTAB 2001)!

•  Capital City began using marks in 1975!•  Mark CITIBANK became famous in 1983!

Fame issue is dispositive, but found additional bases for denying dilution claim by addressing 6 statutory dilution factors in dicta!

No Dilution by Blurring!

versus!

:"#*$2109&W"1$.$M&Y&&'.-%.$#%.("$"--&*K&'"-.M$&W103-&

-H#I2.3%!B#D$,7%C.D@%E@%1$"'(%12.2%!"('#3$N&BDe&UEA2&==c&\c%I&;.0E&=D>D^&

W103&.$(*)("2:!

HI1%d-&%I"&*7%#*,"T!

c%I&;.0#7.%&1f0,"2&M01$%&*K&-7,,109&g72M,"$%&.$&K1(*0&*K&2"K"$21$%&*$&F1-.-&%I1%N&$*%5.%I-%1$2.$M&+0"-7,+%.*$&*K&2.-%.$#%.("$"--N&%I"&:%10&:9,F*)&51-&$*%&.$I"0"$%)9&2.-%.$#%.("&1$2&I12&$*%&1#R7.0"2&2.-%.$#%.("$"--&

HI1%d-&.$&2.-+7%":!

V))"M"2&.$K0.$M","$%&*K&0"M.-%"0"2&2"-.M$&,103&

V,1h.$M&:+1#"-&*5$-&%012",103&0"M.-%01%.*$&K*0&c@+*.$%"2&-%10&.$&#.0#)"&HI1%&.-&+0*+"0&1$1)9-.-&K*0&+*%"$%.1)&2.-%.$#%.("$"--&*K&1&0"M.-%"0"2&2"-.M$&,103&

80"-7,+%.*$&*K&'.-%.$#%.("$"--T!Evidence of non-distinctiveness can rebut the presumption of validity!

Such evidence reduces the presumption merely to “evidence that the PTO is of the opinion that the Star Symbol is sufficiently distinctive to be legally protectable as a mark”!

Rebuttal evidence presented by defendant!


6$I"0"$%&'.-%.$#%.("$"--T!Traditional Abercrombie trademark categories "(generic, descriptive, suggestive, arbitrary/fanciful)!

“Futile endeavor” with respect to classifying the Star Symbol because “the Abercrombie test fails to illuminate the fundamental inquiry in this case: whether the Star Symbol’s ‘intrinsic nature serves to identify’ Amazing Spaces and its storage services”!However, “not [going] so far as to hold that the Abercrombie test is eclipsed every time a mark other than a word is at issue”!


6$I"0"$%&'.-%.$#%.("$"--T!Applied alternative Seabrook test geared more toward design marks!

To determine whether a design is arbitrary or distinctive, look to whether:![1] a ‘common’ basic shape or design,![2] unique or unusual in a particular field,![3] a mere refinement of a commonly-adopted and well-known form of ornamentation for a particular class of goods viewed by the public as a dress or ornamentation for the goods, or![4] capable of creating a commercial impression distinct from accompanying words!

NOT inherently distinctive – Same or similar star used in “countless” other ways!


V#R7.0"2&'.-%.$#%.("$"--&Y&:"#*$2109&W"1$.$MT!Effect of plaintiff’s usage of Star Symbol!

Plaintiff presented evidence of long usage, substantial sales revenue, and substantial advertising expenses!Nevertheless, evidence also showed that plaintiff primarily used the Star Symbol as a form of ornamentation in association with word marks that functioned as product identifiers!

NO acquired distinctiveness – any secondary meaning was with the word marks and not the Star Symbol!


U0172&

ba6;i&!<;V8%C.%'$%&(,$%A('B('#"2(.N&ceD&UEA2&>=?D&\U"2E&;.0E&=DD`^&&

j("0%70$"2&1$52.(0%J"5@%E@%K$/'(%L#,+7%C.D@N&BC&a:8b=2&>=Dc&\//V[&=DDA^!

Medinol – Fraud is possible if a registrant or applicant merely “should have known” that a material representation to the USPTO was false!

Bose expressly disapproved, instead holding:!(1)  A federal trademark registration can be successfully attacked on the ground that it

was fraudulently procured or maintained only if the applicant or registrant knowingly makes a false, material representation with the intent to deceive the USPTO!

(2)  The record evidence and testimony necessary to support a successful fraud-based challenge to an application or registration must be “clear and convincing”!

(3)  In contrast to prior practice of invalidating fraudulently procured applications and registrations either in their entirety or with respect to entire classes of goods/services, more appropriate remedy may be to “restrict” those filings based on the nonuse of the mark in connection with individual goods and services!

W103-&.$(*)("2:!

HI1%d-&%I"&*7%#*,"T!

//V[&]&U!;8&`\F^&'j<:&kj/&0"R7.0"&%I"&+"%.%.*$"0&%*&$1,"&1&-+"#._#&.$2.(.271)&.$&K0172&1))"M1%.*$-&%*&-1%.-K9&+10%.#7)10.%9&0"R7.0","$%&

Pl/mI"&R7"-%.*$&.-&$*%&5I"%I"0&+"%.%.*$"0&I1-&1))"M"2&%I1%&1&$*$+10%9&n-+"#._#&.$2.(.271)d&I12&%I"&0"R7.-.%"&.$%"$%N&F7%&01%I"0&5I"%I"0&%I"&+"%.%.*$"0&I1-&1))"M"2&5.%I&+10%.#7)10.%9&%I1%&0"-+*$2"$%N&%I"&2"K"$21$%&1$2&*5$"0&*K&%I"&-7Fg"#%&!"M.-%01%.*$-N&I12&%I"&0"R7.-.%"&.$%"$%EQ&

HI1%d-&.$&2.-+7%":!

8"%.%.*$&%*&#1$#")&%012",103&0"M.-%01%.*$-&F1-"2&*$&K0172&F"K*0"&a:8/j&

!"-+*$2"$%&_)"2&!7)"&`\F^&,*%.*$&%*&2.-,.--&K*0&K1.)70"&%*&12"R71%")9&+)"12&K0172&7$2"0&%I"&&(,$&-%1$2102&]&.$&+10%.#7)10N&0"-+*$2"$%&#)1.,"2&%I1%&K1.)70"&%*&.2"$%.K9&-+"#._#&.$2.(.271)&5.%I&.$%"$%&%*&2"#".("&51-&K1%1)&

1$DF#"I$'%J(M$.N'#/%&$.$52F"%O$'N%PG%%E@%OQ2"$%G(057%JJAN&`c&a:8b=2&>>ec&\//V[&=D>D^&&

W103-&.$(*)("2:!

HI1%d-&%I"&*7%#*,"T!

//V[&#.%"2&%*&&(,$&K*0&%I"&,1%"0.1)&)"M1)&2.-%.$#%.*$&F"%5""$&1&PK1)-"Q&0"+0"-"$%1%.*$&1$2&1&PK01727)"$%Q&*$"N&1$2&K*0&%I"&07)"&%I1%&K0172&0"R7.0"-&P1&K1)-"N&,1%"0.1)&,.-0"+0"-"$%1%.*$&5.%I&%I"&.$%"$%&%*&2"#".("&%I"&a:8/jQ&

//V[&K*7$2&P$*&"(.2"$#"&*0&%"-%.,*$9&.$2.#1%.$M&%I1%&W;6&51-&12(.-"2&%I1%&.%&#*7)2&*0&-I*7)2&$*%&1++)9&K*0&W"O.#1$&K**2&+0*27#%-&$*%&.2"$%._"2&F9Q&%I"&,103N&%I7-&0"M.-%01$%&)1#3"2&2"#"+%.("&.$%"$%&

j("0)9&F0*12&2"-#0.+%.*$&*K&M**2-&51-&-%.))&$100*5"2&%*&0"o"#%&+0*+"0&-#*+"&

HI1%d-&.$&2.-+7%":!

8"%.%.*$&%*&#1$#")&%012",103&0"M.-%01%.*$&F1-"2&*$&K0172&F"K*0"&a:8/j&

6-&1$&*("0)9&F0*12&2"-#0.+%.*$&*K&M**2-&1&(1).2&F1-.-&K*0&_$2.$M&2"#"+%.("&.$%"$%&.K&12(.#"&*K&#*7$-")&51-&-*7MI%&F9&%I"&0"M.-%01$%L&

1@A@C@%4((5,7%C.D@%E@%&'#56%&/."$N&`B&a:8b=2&>c??&\//V[&=D>D &̂&

W103&.$(*)("2:!

HI1%d-&%I"&*7%#*,"T!

k*&]&U*0&.$%"$%&%*&2"#".("N&-7,,109&g72M,"$%&0"R7.0"-&%I1%&-"+101%"&2.0"#%N&.$2.0"#%N&*0&#.0#7,-%1$%.1)&"(.2"$#"&F"&*J"0"2&%*&-I*5&%I"&1F-"$#"&*K&1$9&.--7"&*K&,1%"0.1)&K1#%&0"M102.$M&.$%"$%&%*&2"#".("&

:1%.-_"2&U!;8&`\F^&F"#17-"&P5I"0"&1&+)"12.$M&1--"0%-&%I1%&1&3$*5$&,.-0"+0"-"$%1%.*$N&*$&1&,1%"0.1)&,1%%"0N&.-&,12"&%*&+0*#70"&1&0"M.-%01%.*$N&%I"&")","$%&*K&.$%"$%N&.$2.-+"$-.F)"&%*&1&K0172&#)1.,N&I1-&F""$&-7f#."$%)9&+)"2Q&

k"("0%I")"--N&&(,$&"-%1F).-I"2&1&$"5&#)"10&1$2&#*$(.$#.$M&-%1$2102&K*0&K0172&1$2&.$-7f#."$%&"(.2"$#"&51-&+0*27#"2&%*&12"R71%")9&+0*("&.$%"$%&%*&2"#".("&

HI1%d-&.$&2.-+7%":!

8"%.%.*$&%*&#1$#")&%012",103&0"M.-%01%.*$&F1-"2&*$&K0172&F"K*0"&a:8/j&

6K&-7f#."$%&+10%.#7)10.%9&.-&.$#)72"2&%*&-1%.-K9&U!;8&`\F^N&.-&%I1%&$"#"--10.)9&-7f#."$%&%*&-7##""2&*$&-7,,109&g72M,"$%L&

DaimlerChrysler Corp. and Chrysler, LLC v. American Motors Corp.,"95 USPQ2d 1086 (TTAB 2010)

a-"&.$&;*,,"0#"&

W103-&.$(*)("2:!

HI1%d-&%I"&*7%#*,"T!

e%I&;.0#7.%&1f0,"2&*$&1))&#*7$%-&

V-&%*&P7-"&.$&#*,,"0#"Q&.--7"N&+)1.$%.J&K1.)"2&%*&-I*5&1$9&-1)"&*0&%01$-+*0%&*K&M**2-&F"10.$M&%I"&2.-+7%"2&,103p&.$-%"12N&%I"&1--"0%"2&7-"&51-&,"0"&12("0%.-.$M&5.%I&$*&M**2-&1##*,+1$9.$M&-7#I&12("0%.-.$M&

8)1.$%.J&%I7-&K1.)"2&%*&"-%1F).-I&1&%0.1F)"&.--7"&*K&K1#%&1$2&-7,,109&g72M,"$%&51-&M01$%"2&

HI1%d-&.$&2.-+7%":!

V))"M"2&.$K0.$M","$%&*K&#*,,*$&)15&%012",103&

'"K"$21$%&#)1.,"2&%I1%&.%-&1#%.(.%."-&2.2&$*%&#*$-%.%7%"&P7-"&.$&#*,,"0#"Q&1-&2"_$"2&F9&%I"&41$I1,&V#%&\1,*$M&*%I"0&1--"0%"2&2"K"$-"-^&

Sensient Technologies Corp., et al v. SensoryEffects Flavor Co.,"613 F.3d 754 (8th Cir. 2010) !

:<k:6<k/&U4VSj!:&&&("0-7-&&&:<k:j!qU4VSj!:!

a-"&.$&;*,,"0#"T!Scope of use by defendant!

Two customer presentations, a press release, an announcement, and an “under construction” website!Unsuccessful in landing new business – no sales were made, no packages were sent, and no goods were transported bearing the dispute mark!

Does Section 45 of Lanham Act apply to both registration and infringement?!Civil liability for infringement requires “use in commerce”!Section 45 defines “use in commerce” to require “sold or transported in commerce” but plaintiff belatedly questioned whether Section 45 applies only in a registration context!Due to untimeliness, court applied Section 45 but affirmatively declined to express view as whether Section 45 properly applies in infringement cases!

:<k:6<k/&U4VSj!:&&&("0-7-&&&:<k:j!qU4VSj!:!

Sensient Technologies Corp., et al v. SensoryEffects Flavor Co.,"613 F.3d 754 (8th Cir. 2010) !

V2,.--.F.).%9&*K&6$%"0$"%&P'*#7,"$%-Q&

HI1%d-&%I"&*7%#*,"T!

q<:&]&6$%"0$"%&2*#7,"$%-&,19&F"&12,.%%"2&.$%*&"(.2"$#"&%I0*7MI&1&$*%.#"&*K&0").1$#"&7$2"0&/012",103&!7)"&=E>==\"^&.K&%I"&2*#7,"$%&P.2"$%._"-&.%-&21%"&*K&+7F).#1%.*$&*0&21%"&%I1%&.%&51-&1##"--"2&1$2&+0.$%"2N&1$2&.%-&-*70#"EQ&

@ &:")K@17%I"$%.#1%.$M&]&$*&5.%$"--&%"-%.,*$9&0"R7.0"2&@ &PlHm"&,7-%&0"#*M$.h"&1$2&121+%&%*&#I1$M"-&.$&%"#I$*)*M9N&+10%.#7)10)9&%I"&+0"(1)"$#"&*K&%I"&6$%"0$"%Q&

kj/<T&\>^  W7-%&.$#)72"&1&-*70#"&.2"$%._"0&).3"&1&a!4&1$2&1&+0.$%Y+7F).#1%.*$&21%"&\=^  W7-%&-+"#._#1))9&.$2.#1%"&%I"&0")"(1$#9&*K&%I"&2*#7,"$%&F9&+*.$%.$M&%*&1&

-+"#._#&)"M1)&K1#%*0&F".$M&-7++*0%"2&1$2&%I"&+*0%.*$\-^&*K&%I"&2*#7,"$%&-7++*0%.$M&-7#I&K1#%*0&

\A^  //V[&P7$2"0-#*0"l2m&%I1%&1&+0.$%*7%&K0*,&1&5"F+1M"&,19&I1("&,*0"&).,.%1%.*$-&*$&.%-&+0*F1%.("&(1)7"&%I1$&%012.%.*$1)&+0.$%"2&+7F).#1%.*$-NQ&-*&5.%$"--&%"-%.,*$9&,19&-%.))&F"&("09&I")+K7)&%*&.$#0"1-"&5".MI%&M.("$&

HI1%d-&.$&2.-+7%":!

HI1%&.-&+0*+"0&,"%I*2&*K&17%I"$%.#1%.*$&K*0&2*#7,"$%-&+0.$%"2&K0*,&6$%"0$"%L&

Safer, Inc. v. OMS Investments, Inc.,"94 USPQ2d 1031 (TTAB 2010)

HI1%d-&%I"&*7%#*,"T!

q<:&

=DDC&1,"$2,"$%&%*&!7)"&=E>==\2^\>^&+"0,.%-&7-"&*K&/V!!&+0.$%*7%-&1%&+)"12.$M&-%1M"E&&'"-+.%"&-"",.$M)9&#*$%0109&)1$M71M"&.$&!7)"&=E>==\2^\=^N&%I.-&!7)"&1++)."-&5.%I&"R71)&K*0#"&%*&%0.1)&F"K*0"&%I"&//V[E&

V##*02.$M&%*&//V[N&P%I"&.$#)7-.*$&.$&%I"&1,"$2"2&07)"&*K&1$&*+%.*$&%*&+0*("&1&+)"12"2&0"M.-%01%.*$&F9&0")9.$M&*$&a:8/j&0"#*02-&r&#1$&*$)9&F"&%13"$&1-&1$&.$2.#1%.*$&%I1%&%I"&*f#"&,"1$%&%*&).F"01).h"&%I"&,"1$-&K*0&+0*(.2.$M&1&+)"12"2&0"M.-%01%.*$Q&

HI1%d-&.$&2.-+7%":!

V0"&/V!!&+0.$%*7%-&1##"+%1F)"&K*0&"$%"0.$M&0"M.-%01%.*$-&.$%*&"(.2"$#"&1%&%0.1)L&

Research In Motion v. NBOR Corp.,"92 USPQ2d 1926 (TTAB 2009)

V$%.@;9F"0-R71%%.$M&;*$-7,"0&80*%"#%.*$&V#%&\V;8V&̂

HI1%d-&%I"&*7%#*,"T!

WVq[<&

;*70%&1#3$*5)"2M"2&%I1%&"1#I&.-&1&P$*(")&#17-"&*K&1#%.*$Q&F7%&2"$."2&%I"&2"K"$21$%-d&,*%.*$&%*&2.-,.--&F"#17-"&P1&#*70%&-I*7)2&M*&F"9*$2&%I"&).%"01)&)1$M71M"&*K&1&-%1%7%"&.K&0").1$#"&*$&%I1%&)1$M71M"&5*7)2&2"K"1%&%I"&+)1.$&+70+*-"&*K&%I"&-%1%7%"Q&

HI.)"&$".%I"0&I1-&F""$&"O+).#.%)9&1220"--"2&F9&1$&1++"))1%"&#*70%&$*0&F9&-%1%7%"N&-"("01)&2.-%0.#%&#*70%-&I1("&1%&)"1-%&2.-#7--"2&%I"&+*--.F.).%9&*K&-7#I&#17-"-&*K&1#%.*$N&%I7-&0"K7-1)&%*&2.-,.--&.-&1++0*+0.1%"&

HI1%d-&.$&2.-+7%":!

<$M1M"2&.$&+1%%"0$&*K&+0*,*%.$M&",*%.#*$@0")1%"2&-*K%510"&F9&0"M.-%"0.$M&-"0."-&*K&2*,1.$-&.$#*0+*01%.$M&W.#0*-*K%&%012",103-&H"$%&*$"&-%"+&K70%I"0&F9&2"(")*+.$M&1$2&,103"%.$M&%*&%I.02&+10%."-&%I"&PW1M.#&[7))"%&:9-%",Q&.$%"$2"2&%*&.$27#"&*%I"0-&%*&2*&%I"&-1,"&

6-&%I"0"&1&#17-"&*K&1#%.*$&K*0&P#*$%0.F7%*09&#9F"0-R71%%.$MQL&6-&%I"0"&1&#17-"&*K&1#%.*$&K*0&P#*$%0.F7%*09&2.)7%.*$QL&

Microsoft Corp. v. Shah et al.,"2011 Dist. LEXIS 2995 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 12, 2011)

/012",103&'.)7%.*$&!"(.-.*$&V#%&*K&=DDB&\/'!V&̂

W103&.$(*)("2:!

HI1%d-&%I"&*7%#*,"T!

WVq[<&]&F7%&$*%&.$&%I.-&#1-"&F"#17-"&$*&"(.2"$#"&*K&5.2"-+0"12&aE:E&0"#*M$.%.*$&

//V[&P0"#*M$.h"l-m&%I"&+*--.F.).%9&%I1%N&.$&1$&7$7-71)&#1-"N&1#%.(.%9&*7%-.2"&%I"&a$.%"2&:%1%"-&0")1%"2&%*&1&,103&#*7)2&+*%"$%.1))9&0"-7)%&.$&%I"&,103&F"#*,.$M&5"))@3$*5$&5.%I.$&%I"&a$.%"2&:%1%"-N&"("$&5.%I*7%&1$9&K*0,&*K&1#%.(.%9&.$&%I"&a$.%"2&:%1%"-Q&

k"("0%I")"--N&$*&2.)7%.*$&#17-"&*K&1#%.*$&"O.-%-&PK*0&K1,*7-&7$0"M.-%"0"2&,103-&$*%&.$&7-"N&.$&-*,"&519N&.$&%I"&a$.%"2&:%1%"-N&.$&%I"&1F-"$#"&*K&1&-+"#._#&+)"12.$M&*K&.$%"$%&%*&7-"N&%I"&_).$M&*K&1$&1++).#1%.*$&K*0&0"M.-%01%.*$N&1$2&-*,"&F1-.-&K*0&#*$#)72.$M&%I1%&0"#*M$.%.*$&*K&%I"&,103&.$&%I"&a$.%"2&:%1%"-&.-&-7f#."$%)9&5.2"-+0"12&r&"("$&.K&%I"&+0*27#%-&*0&-"0(.#"-&10"&$*%&1(1.)1F)"&.$&%I"&a$.%"2&:%1%"-Q&

HI1%d-&.$&2.-+7%":!

j++*-.%.*$&%*&%012",103&1++).#1%.*$&F1-"2&*$&:"#%.*$&?A\#^&2.)7%.*$&

'*"-&K1,"&.$&1&#*7$%09&*%I"0&%I1$&%I"&aE:E&-7++*0%&1&2.)7%.*$&#)1.,L&

Fiat Group Automobiles S.p.A. v. ISM, Inc.,"94 USPQ2d 1111 (TTAB 2010)

W103&.$(*)("2:!

HI1%d-&%I"&*7%#*,"T!

H*5XXX&&U.0-%&%.,"&.$&C&9"10-&%I"&//V[&7+I")2&1&2.)7%.*$&#)1.,&

j++*-.%.*$&%*&,103&*$&2.)7%.*$&M0*7$2-&0"R7.0"-&A&")","$%-T&\>^  *++*-"0d-&,103&.-&K1,*7-&\=^  *++*-"0d-&,103&F"#1,"&K1,*7-&+0.*0&%*&21%"&*K&1++).#1%.*$&%*&0"M.-%"0&

1++).#1$%d-&,103&\A^  V++).#1$%d-&,103&.-&).3")9&%*&F)70&2.-%.$#%.("$"--&*K&*++*-"0d-&,103&

//V[&K*7$2&+"0-71-.("&1&P5"))@2"-.M$"2Q&%")"+I*$"&-70("9&%I1%&"-%1F).-I"2&1$&1--*#.1%.*$&F"%5""$&%I"&%5*&,103-&%I1%&51-&+0*F1%.("&*K&).3").I**2&*K&2.)7%.*$&

HI1%d-&.$&2.-+7%":! j++*-.%.*$&%*&%012",103&1++).#1%.*$&F1-"2&*$&:"#%.*$&?A\#^&2.)7%.*$&

Nat’l Pork Board and Nat’l Pork Producers Council v. Supreme Lobster and Seafood Company, 96 USPQ2d 1479 (TTAB 2010)

W103&.$(*)("2:!

HI1%d-&%I"&*7%#*,"T!

:%.))&0")"(1$%&1-&*$"&*K&-"("01)&K1#%*0-&]&F7%&$*%&2.-+*-.%.("&

6$&=DDAN&:7+0","&;*70%&.$&1(,$0$6%E@%L@%!$D'$"%A#"#0(3/$&I")2&%I1%&%I"&U/'V&0"R7.0"-&1#%71)&2.)7%.*$&01%I"0&%I1$&1&,"0"&).3").I**2&*K&2.)7%.*$&6$&=DDBN&%I"&/'!V&0"+)1#"2&%I"&U/'V&]&+0*(.2"-&0")."K&K*0&).3")9&2.)7%.*$&1$2&122-&0")."K&K*0&2.)7%.*$&F9&F)700.$M&1$2&F9&%10$.-I,"$%&

Pk*&2*7F%N&-.,.)10.%9&I1-&1&-+"#.1)&0*)"&%*&+)19&.$&%I"&.,+)","$%1%.*$&*K&%I"&$"5&-%1%7%"d-&,7)%.K1#%*0&1++0*1#IE&r&k"("0%I")"--N&;*$M0"--d-&2"#.-.*$&%*&,13"&n2"M0""&*K&-.,.)10.%9d&*$"&#*$-.2"01%.*$&.$&1&,7)%.K1#%*0&).-%&-%0*$M)9&-7MM"-%-&%I1%&.%&2.2&$*%&51$%&n2"M0""&*K&-.,.)10.%9d&%*&F"&%I"&$"#"--10.)9&#*$%0*)).$M&K1#%*0EQ&

HI1%d-&.$&2.-+7%":!

;)1.,&*K&2.)7%.*$&7$2"0&/012",103&'.)7%.*$&!"(.-.*$&V#%&*K&=DDB&\/'!V^&

'.2&%I"&P.2"$%.#1)&*0&$"10)9&.2"$%.#1)Q&-%1$2102&K*0&%012",103&2.)7%.*$&-70(.("&"$1#%,"$%&*K&%I"&/'!VL&

Levi Strauss & Company v. Abercrombie & Fitch Trading Company,"633 F.3d 1158 (9th Cir. 2011)

'.-M*0M","$%&*K&80*_%-&Y&a$g7-%&<$0.#I,"$%&

W103&.$(*)("2:!

HI1%d-&%I"&*7%#*,"T!

Pa+*$&+0**K&*K&5.))K7)&.$K0.$M","$%N&n1$&1##*7$%.$M&*K&+0*_%-&,19&F"&F1-"2&7+*$&>^&7$g7-%&"$0.#I,"$%N&=^&21,1M"-N&*0&A^&2"%"00"$#"&*K&1&5.))K7)&.$K0.$M"0EQ&

e%I&;.0#7.%d-&1$1)9-.-T&@ &V--7,"2N&5.%I*7%&2"#.2.$MN&%I1%&5.))K7)&.$K0.$M","$%&.-&1&+0"0"R7.-.%"&%*&,*$"%109&0")."K&@ &80**K&*K&1#%71)&#*$K7-.*$&.-&$*%&$"#"--109&%*&0"#*("0&.$K0.$M.$M&+10%9d-&+0*_%-&@ PV$&15102&*K&,*$"%109&0")."K&7$2"0&%I"&41$I1,&V#%&,7-%&F"&#*,+"$-1%*09N&$*%&1&+"$1)%9E&&6%&2*"-&$*%&K*))*5N&I*5"("0N&%I1%&1&_$2.$M&*K&21,1M"-&.-&1&+0"#*$2.%.*$&*K&1$9&,*$"%109&15102EQ&

s=E?&,.)).*$&("02.#%&.-&$*%&+7$.%.("N&F7%&0"-%-&*$&(1).2&01%.*$1)"&*K&7$g7-%&"$0.#I,"$%&

HI1%d-&.$&2.-+7%":!

VK%"0&_$2.$M&*K&5.))K7)&%012",103&.$K0.$M","$%N&I*5&)10M"&1&,*$"%109&15102L&

t709&K*7$2&$*&1#%71)&21,1M"-N&F7%&15102"2&s=E?&,.)).*$&F1-"2&*$&7$g7-%&"$0.#I,"$%&\2.-M*0M","$%&*K&+0*_%-^&

Masters v. UHS of Delaware, Inc.,"631 F.3d 464 (8th Cir. 2011)

Economy & Finance

2010 11 recent developments in trademark law - kelly kubasta