Acquired Distintiveness

Home/Acquired Distintiveness

SoCal IP Institute :: March 20, 2017 :: Recent patent cases

For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, March 20, 2017, we will discuss the following: Nidec Motor Corporation v. Zhongshan Broad Ocean Motor Co. Ltd., et. al (Fed. Cir. Mar. 14, 2017) (available here).  Nidec appealed the PTAB's decision finding one of its claims anticipated in an IPR proceeding. The Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB's ruling [...]

By |2017-03-19T16:44:31-07:00March 19th, 2017|Patent, Trademark, Acquired Distintiveness|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: March 13, 2017 :: A “Non-Commercial” Creative Commons License; Coney Island Specimen Refused in Citeable TTAB Decision

For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, March 13, 2017, we will discuss the following: Great Minds v. FedEx (E.D.N.Y Feb. 24, 2017) (available here).  This case discusses a"Non-Commercial" Creative Commons License.  In sum, FedEx was copying materials made by Plaintiff Great Minds, a math curriculum called "Eureka Math."  The court granted FedEx's motion to [...]

By |2017-03-08T15:25:54-07:00March 8th, 2017|Patent, Trademark, Acquired Distintiveness|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: March 6, 2017 :: Preliminary Injunction for Riding Lawnmower Patent Affirmed and No Trademark Registration for DEEP! DEEP! DISH PIZZA

For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, March 6, 2017, we will discuss the following: Metalcraft of Mayville, Inc. v. The Toro Company (Fed. Cir. February 16, 2016) (available here).  A manufacturer of commercial riding lawnmowers brought a suit for infringement of a patent disclosing a suspended operator platform for a ride-on lawnmower.  The district court [...]

By |2017-03-04T13:11:42-07:00March 4th, 2017|Patent, Trademark, Acquired Distintiveness|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: February 6, 2017 :: CA finds attorney bills can be privileged and a trademark registration for white gunpowder

For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, February 6, 2017, we will discuss the following: Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (Cal., December 29, 2016) (available here).  Reversing a lower court opinion, the California Supreme Court found that attorney billing invoices for work in pending and [...]

By |2017-01-31T10:26:22-07:00January 31st, 2017|Trademark, TTAB, Acquired Distintiveness|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: April 18, 2016 :: Mark Fails to Prove Acquired Distinctiveness at TTAB; Google Adwords Don’t Infringe

For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, April 18, 2016, we will discuss the following cases: Ayoub, Inc. and Ayoub Supply, LLC v. ACS Ayoub Carpet Service (TTAB March 31, 2016) (citable decision) (available here).  In an opposition proceeding, applicant could not demonstrate that "Ayoub" had acquired distinctiveness due to lack of substantially exclusive use, [...]