Maintaining the secrecy of documents produced in the context of discovery between parties is generally more permissible than in the context of court filings because there is a strong presumption in favor of the openness of court records. See, e.g., In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation, 927 F.3d 919, 938-939 (6th Cir. 2019); Shane Grp., […]
On September 26, 2023, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued U.S. Patent No. D1,000,000. The one-millionth design patent. This design patent was issued to Agustina Huckaby of Fort Worth, Texas, for a dispensing comb. Huckaby, a licensed cosmetologist, markets her business under the federally registered trademark POMP AND POWDER. The first U.S. design […]
Slogans, phrases, and other terms that are considered to be merely informational in nature are generally not registrable. See In re Eagle Crest Inc., 96 USPQ2d 1227, 1232 (TTAB 2010) (“ONCE A MARINE, ALWAYS A MARINE is an old and familiar Marine expression, and as such it is the type of expression that should remain […]
If competing trademarks convey the same idea, meaning or commercial impression, then they might be confusingly similar if used on the same goods. See, e.g., Proctor & Gamble Co. v. Conway, 419 F.2d 1332, 164 USPQ 301, 304 (CCPA 1970) (holding MISTER STAIN likely to be confused with MR. CLEAN on cleaning products); In re […]
“Foreign laws that block the production of discoverable material do not automatically excuse a party from its Rule 26 obligations.” Philips Medical Systems (Cleveland), Inc. v. Buan, No. 19 CV 2648, 2022 WL 602485, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 1, 2022); see also Société Nationale Industrielle Aérospatiale v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for S. Dist. of […]