Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Last updated

The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) is an administrative tribunal within the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The TTAB is empowered to determine the right to register a trademark. It has no authority to determine the right to use one, nor broader questions of infringement, unfair competition, damages or injunctive relief. The TTAB decides ex parte appeals from decisions by USPTO Examiners denying registration of marks, and inter partes proceedings challenging the registration of marks. Decisions of the TTAB may be appealed to a United States district court, or to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Contents

Practices and procedures for litigating before the TTAB are governed by the Trademark Rules of Practice and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure (TBMP) is an important guide to practice before the TTAB.

Judges of the TTAB

The Administrative Trademark Judges of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) are appointed by the United States Secretary of Commerce in consultation with the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property. Each appeal and adversarial proceeding is heard and decided by at least three judges of the TTAB. There are currently twenty-five judges sitting at the TTAB (as of January 2024), as follows:

JudgeAppointedPrior professional experienceEducation
Gerard F. Rogers (Chief Judge)1999Trademark Examining Attorney, 1987–90; Assistant to the Assistant Commissioner for Trademarks, 1990–92; TTAB Staff Attorney, 1992–99B.A., University of Massachusetts Amherst; J.D. magna cum laude, New England School of Law
Michael B. Adlin 2012Private Practice; USPTO Office of External Affairs; TTAB Interlocutory AttorneyB.A., Duke University; J.D., Boston University School of Law
Martha B. Allard 2021Private Practice (Nashville, TN)B.S., University of Kentucky; J.D. cum laude, Western New England University School of Law
Thomas L. Casagrande 2023Law Clerk to Hon. B. Avant Edenfield, Chief U.S. District Judge (S.D. Ga.); Private Practice (Houston, TX; New Haven, CT); Associate Solicitor USPTOB.A., University of Pennsylvania; J.D. with Honors, University of Connecticut School of Law
Peter W. Cataldo 2006Trademark Examining Attorney; TTAB Interlocutory AttorneyB.A., Canisius College; J.D., Albany Law School
Robert H. Coggins 2016Trademark Examining Attorney; TTAB Interlocutory AttorneyB.S., Davidson College; J.D., Wake Forest University School of Law
Wendy B. Cohen 2023Private Practice; TTAB Interlocutory AttorneyB.A., University of Missouri - Columbia; J.D., University of Missouri School of Law
Elizabeth A. Dunn 2019Trademark Examining Attorney; TTAB Interlocutory AttorneyB.A., Boston University; J.D., American University Washington College of Law
Jennifer L. Elgin 2023Private Practice; TTAB Interlocutory AttorneyB.S., Cornell University; J.D., Emory University School of Law
Christen M. English 2019Private Practice; TTAB Interlocutory AttorneyB.A., Boston College; J.D., Columbus School of Law
Cheryl S. Goodman 2014Trademark Examining Attorney; TTAB Interlocutory AttorneyB.A., University of Illinois; J.D., Florida State University College of Law
Cindy B. Greenbaum 2012Private Practice (New York, NY; Washington, DC); Trademark Examining Attorney; TTAB Interlocutory Attorney; TTAB Managing Interlocutory Attorney Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania; J.D., New York University School of Law
David K. Heasley 2015Private Practice (Washington, DC)B.A., Johns Hopkins University; J.D., University of Maryland School of Law
Melanye K. Johnson 2020Private Practice (Detroit, MI; Washington, DC); Corporate Counsel; Senior Counsel, Office of General Counsel at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)B.A., University of Michigan; J.D., Ohio State University Moritz College of Law
Karen S. Kuhlke 2005Private Practice (Washington, DC); Trademark Examining Attorney; TTAB Interlocutory AttorneyB.A., University of Kansas; M.A., Columbia University; J.D., Georgetown University Law Center
Christopher C. Larkin 2016Private Practice (Los Angeles, CA; New York, NY);B.A., Stanford University; J.D., Columbia Law School
Mark Lebow 2020Private Practice (Alexandria, VA)B.A., Florida Atlantic University; J.D., Hofstra University School of Law; LL.M. with high honors, John Marshall Law School
Angela Lykos 2010Trademark Examining Attorney; TTAB Interlocutory Attorney; Private PracticeB.A., M.A., Johns Hopkins University; J.D., Duke University Law School
Cynthia C. Lynch 2015Private Practice; Attorney-Advisor at the International Trade Commission; USPTO Assistant Solicitor: USPTO Administrator for Trademark Policy and ProcedureB.A., University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; J.D., University of Virginia School of Law
George C. Pologeorgis 2015TTAB Interlocutory Attorney; TTAB Attorney in the Office of Trademark Quality Review and Training; Trademark Examining Attorney; Private PracticeB.A. University of Pennsylvania; J.D., George Washington University National Law Center
Thomas V. Shaw 2011USPTO Associate Solicitor; Trademark Managing Attorney; Trademark Senior Attorney; Trademark Examining AttorneyB.A., The George Washington University; J.D., University of Miami School of Law
Jyll S. Taylor 2006TTAB Interlocutory Attorney; Trademark Examining AttorneyB.A., University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; J.D., Howard University School of Law
Mark A. Thurmon 2019Private practice; adjunct professor of law, University of Texas School of Law; assistant professor of law, Levin College of Law; professor of law, Southern University Law Center; former Deputy Chief Administrative Trademark JudgeB.S, Louisiana State University; J.D. with high honors, Duke University School of Law
Thomas W. Wellington 2007TTAB Interlocutory Attorney; Trademark Examining Attorney; Private PracticeB.A., University of Maryland at College Park; J.D., American University Washington College of Law
Albert J. Zervas 2005Trademark Examining Attorney; TTAB Interlocutory Attorney; Private Practice (New York, NY; Washington, DC)B.A. and J.D., University of Virginia

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States trademark law</span>

A trademark is a word, phrase, or logo that identifies the source of goods or services. Trademark law protects a business' commercial identity or brand by discouraging other businesses from adopting a name or logo that is "confusingly similar" to an existing trademark. The goal is to allow consumers to easily identify the producers of goods and services and avoid confusion.

A patent attorney is an attorney who has the specialized qualifications necessary for representing clients in obtaining patents and acting in all matters and procedures relating to patent law and practice, such as filing patent applications and oppositions to granted patents.

The Trademark Official Gazette(TMOG) is a weekly publication of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) which publishes newly registered trademarks. Once a trademark application has been examined by a USPTO examining attorney and found to be entitled to registration, it is published in the Official Gazette of the USPTO.

Leo D. Stoller is an American self-styled "intellectual property entrepreneur" based in suburban Chicago, Illinois. Stoller claimed rights to a large inventory of well-known trademarks and engaged in the assertive enforcement of those alleged trademark rights, threatening infringement action against people and companies who attempt to use similar marks.

The United States is considered to have the most favorable legal regime for inventors and patent owners in the world. Under United States law, a patent is a right granted to the inventor of a (1) process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter, (2) that is new, useful, and non-obvious. A patent is the right to exclude others, for a limited time from profiting from a patented technology without the consent of the patent holder. Specifically, it is the right to exclude others from: making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing, inducing others to infringe, applying for an FDA approval, and/or offering a product specially adapted for practice of the patent.

A colour trade mark or color trademark is a non-conventional trade mark where at least one colour is used to perform the trade mark function of uniquely identifying the commercial origin of products or services.

Disparagement, in United States trademark law, was a statutory cause of action which permitted a party to petition the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to cancel a trademark registration that "may disparage or falsely suggest a connection with persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt or disrepute". In 2017, the Supreme Court struck down the disparagement provision as unconstitutional in Matal v. Tam.

The Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) was an administrative law body of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) which decided issues of patentability. Under the America Invents Act, the BPAI was replaced with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), effective September 16, 2012.

The Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) is published by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for use by patent attorneys and agents and patent examiners. It describes all of the laws and regulations that must be followed in the examination of U.S. patent applications, and articulates their application to an enormous variety of different situations. The MPEP is based on Title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which derives its authority from Title 35 of the United States Code, as well as on case law arising under those titles. The first version of the MPEP was published in 1920 by the Patent and Trademark Office Society.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Concurrent use registration</span> Federal trademark registration of the same trademark to two or more unrelated parties

A concurrent use registration, in United States trademark law, is a federal trademark registration of the same trademark to two or more unrelated parties, with each party having a registration limited to a distinct geographic area. Such a registration is achieved by filing a concurrent use application and then prevailing in a concurrent use proceeding before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ("TTAB"), which is a judicial body within the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO"). A concurrent use application may be filed with respect to a trademark which is already registered or otherwise in use by another party, but may be allowed to go forward based on the assertion that the existing use can co-exist with the new registration without causing consumer confusion.

In the United States, an Office action is a document written by an examiner in a patent or trademark examination procedure and mailed to an applicant for a patent or trademark. The expression is used in many jurisdictions.

<i>Wrenn v. Boy Scouts of America</i>

Wrenn v. Boy Scouts of America, No. 3:03-cv-04057, was a case before the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; Wrenn asked for the cancellation of federal trademark registrations of the Boy Scouts of America.

Richard P. Minsky is an American scholar of bookbinding and a book artist. He is the founder of the Center for Book Arts in New York City.

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is an administrative law body of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) which decides issues of patentability. It was formed on September 16, 2012, as one part of the America Invents Act. Prior to its formation, the main judicial body in the USPTO was the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI).

The Washington Redskins trademark dispute was a legal effort by Native Americans to define the term "redskin" to be an offensive and pejorative racial slur to deprive the owners of the NFL's Washington Redskins of the ability to maintain federal trademark protection for the name. These efforts had primarily been carried forward in two cases brought before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). While prevailing in the most recent case in which the trademarks were cancelled, petitioners withdrew for further litigation now that the legal issue has become moot due to a decision in another case which found the relevant portion of the trademark law to be an unconstitutional infringement on freedom of speech.

Lens.com, Inc. v. 1-800 Contacts, Inc., 686 F.3d 1376, is a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit which ruled that when software merely acts as a "conduit" for providing services over the internet, and does not have an independent value per se, it does not constitute a "good" being "sold or transported in commerce" for the purposes of establishing whether or not a trademark for "computer software" has been "abandoned" under 15 U.S.C. § 1064 and 15 U.S.C. § 1127

Iancu v. Brunetti, No. 18–302, 588 U.S. ___ (2019), is a Supreme Court of the United States case related to the registration of trademarks under the Lanham Act. It decided 6–3 that the provisions of the Lanham Act prohibiting registration of trademarks of "immoral" or "scandalous" matter is unconstitutional by permitting the United States Patent & Trademark Office to engage in viewpoint discrimination, which violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.

Peter v. NantKwest Inc., 589 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case from the October 2019 term.

Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com B. V., 591 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the trademarkability of a generic terms appended with a top-level domain (TLD) specifier. The Court ruled that such names can be trademarked unless the existing combination of term and TLD is considered to have a generic meaning to consumers.

References