An application for a trademark registration may be refused as being merely descriptive if “consist[s] merely of words descriptive of the qualities, ingredients or characteristics of’ the goods or services related to the mark.” In re Oppedahl & Larson LLP, 373 F.3d 1171 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (quoting Estate of P.D. Beckwith, Inc. v. Comm’r of […]
A service mark is associated with services, rather than goods that may be associated with those services. For example, “Snap! Crackle! Pop!” is not a service mark because it is associated with breakfast cereal goods, and not with retail services for selling breakfast cereal. A service mark is used in commerce “when it is used […]
For a patent claim to be entitled to the priority date of an earlier patent application, the earlier patent specification must reasonably convey to those skilled in the art that the inventor had possession of the claimed subject matter as of the filing date. See Ariad Pharms., Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., 598 F.3d […]
A warranty card that a consumer finds only after opening the packaging typically is not considered to be “commercial advertising or promotion” for purposes of false advertising under Section 43(a)(1) of the Lanham Act. See Oakley, Inc. v. Bugaboos Eyewear Corp., 757 F. Supp. 2d 1050, 1057 (S.D. Cal. 2010) (a “warranty card” was not […]
Laches is an equitable defense against a non-vigilant plaintiff who waits too long to file their lawsuit—an inexcusable delay that prejudices the defendant. In Satan Wears Suspenders, Inc. v. Jaar, No. 1:21-cv-00812, 2022 WL 2181449 (S.D.N.Y Jun. 16, 2022), Satan Wears Suspenders, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) is a New York City-based hardcore punk-rock band and independent record […]