As we all know, the EUTM Regulation 2017/1001 now requires the applicant to indicate the goods and services for which the protection of the trademark is sought with sufficient clarity and precision to enable the competent authorities and economic operators, on that sole basis, to determine the extent of the protection sought. But what if…

The New York Oneidas lacked standing to challenge the Interior Department’s approval of the Wisconsin Oneidas’ request to change its name to “Oneida Nation,” despite the Wisconsin tribe’s initiation of USPTO trademark cancellation proceedings against the New York tribe. Following the initiation of trademark cancellation proceedings brought before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board by…

On 14th October 2019 the Italian authorities seized approximately 250 tubes of Prosecco and Pink Peppercorn flavoured Pringles crisps from supermarket chain Tosano in the Veneto region of Northeastern Italy. The ‘administrative seizure’ was ordered on the basis that the name Prosecco – which is protected as Designation of Origin (PDO) under EU Regulation 1308/2013 –…

On 16 October 2019, the long-awaited opinion of Advocate General Tanchev was handed down in the case of Sky Plc & Ots v SkyKick UK Ltd & Anr (Case C-371/18). The opinion is couched in terms of public importance and redressing the balance between the monopolistic nature of trade mark rights and the importance of…

The German manufacturer’s participation in tradeshows in Colorado was “by chance” and did not indicate “purposeful availment” of the forum state, and its efforts to enforce its asserted trade dress occurred outside Colorado. A German company that manufactured ceramic components of medical prostheses was not subject to personal jurisdiction in Colorado, with regard to a…

The panel remanded an award of attorney fees and prejudgment interest based on its new precedent on what makes for an “exceptional” case for purposes of Section 35 of the Lanham Act. The U.S. Circuit Court in New York City has upheld a lower court determination that retailer New York & Company’s infringement of women’s…

Mall operators had actual or constructive knowledge of tenants’ infringement, including prior law enforcement raids and eyewear maker Luxottica’s notifications of trademark infringement. A jury properly found that owners and landlords of the International Discount Mall in College Park, Georgia, had at least constructive knowledge that subtenants were infringing Luxottica Group’s Ray-Ban and Oakley marks…

A licensor’s failure to disclose in discovery an agreement acknowledging that a third party owned the mark was properly sanctioned. Two beach merchandise retailers asserting rights to use the mark “WINGS” in connection with their stores will have to go to trial to sort out their competing rights, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond…