article thumbnail

It’s a Hard Rock Life: Guitar-Shaped Hotel Warrants Trademark, but Hilton Doesn’t

JD Supra Law

In a twin set of precedential opinions, the Trademark Trial & Appeal Board laid the foundation for determining whether building designs can be trademark protected as service marks. 88412764; 88437801 (TTAB May 25, 2023) (Shaw, Goodman, Hudis, ATJs); In re Seminole Tribe of Florida, Ser. In re Palacio Del Rio, Inc.,

article thumbnail

MarkIt to Market® - June 2023: How to Lose a Mark in 3 Ways – Part 1

JD Supra Law

There are plenty of fish in the sea when it comes to trademarks: from word marks to service marks; from symbols to surnames; from product packaging to product design. When the time is right, and you feel like you have found “the one,” it is important to lock it down.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Trade Name Use is not Trademark Use, Says TTAB

The TTABlog

A designation used merely as a trade name cannot be registered under the provisions of the Trademark Act." A designation may function as both a trade name and a trademark. The distinction between trade name use and either trademark or service mark use is often a difficult one to make and often is nebulous in character.”

article thumbnail

TTAB Rules That PARKING.COM Is Generic and Ineligible for Both the Principal and the Supplemental Register

The TTABlog

In a whopping 82-page opinion, the Board affirmed the USPTO's refusal to register PARKING.COM , on either the Principal Register or the Supplemental Register, as a service mark for “website providing information regarding parking availability." 87906630 (August 11, 2023) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Elizabeth A.

article thumbnail

WE’RE HERE TO HELP WITH YOUR LEGAL NEEDS! Fails to Function as a Source Indicator for. Guess What?

The TTABlog

The Board affirmed a refusal to register the proposed mark WE’RE HERE TO HELP WITH YOUR LEGAL NEEDS! finding that the phrase fails to function as a service mark for "legal services." 4th 1354, 2023 USPQ2d 1337 (Fed. In re Richard M. LLC , 90 F.4th

article thumbnail

Precedential No. 29: After an Exhausting 2(d) Analysis, TTAB Finds HME (Stylized) Confusable with KME for Building Products

The TTABlog

And the parties’ market interface weighed slightly in favor of opposer "to the extent the parties acknowledged a need for Applicant to choose a non-confusingly similar mark." 2023 USPQ2d 1136 (TTAB 2023) [precedential] (Opinion by Judge Cindy B Greenbaum). Welch 2023. KME Germany GmbH v. Zhejiang Hailiang Co.,

article thumbnail

TTAB Dismisses Opposition: Applicant Proved Priority Through Assignment of Common Law Mark After Proceeding Commenced

The TTABlog

91244990 (December 14, 2023) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Mark A. Without evidence, Game Plan's claim of common law rights was baseless and so the Board considered only its registered service mark rights. Welch 2023. Game Plan, Inc. The sole issue for the Board was priority, and UNIP came in first.

Law 70