Remove patent-reexamination
article thumbnail

TTABlog Quarterly Index: October - December 2021

The TTABlog

35: TTAB Grants MIRAGE BRANDS Cancellation Petition Due To Likelihood of Reverse Confusion On Remand from the CAFC, TTAB Denies Petition for Cancellation of "NAKED" Registration for Condoms TTABlog Test: Three Recent Section 2(d) Inter Partes Cases - How Did They Come Out? & Design" for Beer? Guess What? Yes] Precedential No.

article thumbnail

TMSR Session 2: Administrative Agencies and Specialized Courts

43(B)log

IP Australia also regulates patent & TM attorneys through professional standards board domination. A broader/systemic problem is the problem of scope: we see this in patent side when Office tries to intervene. The business of the PTO is granting patents/TM. If and when that changes, INTA will show up. Money brings attention.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

New PTAB Bill to Drive 101 Compromise?

LexBlog IP

Also yesterday, some of the very same senators introduced the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2023. The co-introduction of these bills suggests a plan to drive compromise on patent eligibility. Tech industry than the liberalized 101 standard of the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.),Thom

article thumbnail

SpicyIP Weekly Review (July 12 – 18)

SpicyIP

She notes that the most controversial provision in the new Bill is the re-introduction of revisionary powers of the Central Government to direct the CBFC Chairman to reexamine an already certified film. In a piece for Live Law, Eashan Ghosh critically analyses Section 22(4) of the Indian Designs Act, 2004.