The LEHMAN BROTHERS mark has been used continuously in the course of winding up the affairs of at least one Lehman Brothers affiliated company. In a case involving competing applications to register the mark LEHMAN BROTHERS, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has affirmed a decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal…

The Board erred by failing to consider whether the registered BROOKLYN BREW SHOP mark has acquired distinctiveness for beer-making kits. In an effort by the owners of the mark BROOKLYN BREWERY to cancel registration of the mark BROOKLYN BREW SHOP, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held that the Trademark Trial…

The district court’s attorney fee award was reasonable and did not violate First Amendment freedom of speech. In a trademark infringement case between two civic organizations that promote political candidates in Louisiana, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a judgment by the district court awarding over $148,000 in attorney fees. In…

The TTAB acted within its discretion in weighing evidence of functionality and alternative designs. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board had sufficient evidence to find that two box designs for electric cables and wire to prevent tangling submitted by applicant Reelex Packaging Solutions, Inc. were functional and not entitled to trademark protection as trade dress,…

An exclusive licensee that did not own the mark outright when the suit began lacked standing to sue for infringement. An exclusive licensee of a trademark when a trademark infringement suit began—which only became the owner of the mark mid-litigation—lacked standing to bring a trademark infringement action, the U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans…

The creators of a seminar critical of Applied Underwriters Inc.’s EquityComp insurance program did not infringe or dilute Applied’s federally registered trademarks by using them in the name of their seminar or the promotional materials related to it, the U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco has held. In affirming a district court’s dismissal because…