Our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, June 2, 2014 will be a discussion of a recent TTAB precedential case and state trade secret opinion. Brief synopses appear below.
Chanel, Inc. v. Jerzy Makarczyk (TTAB May 27, 2014) (available here.). Here, Karczyk (“applicant”), filed an application pursuant to Section 1(a) of the Trademark Act to register the mark CHANEL for “real estate development and construction of commercial, residential and hotel property” in Class 37. Chanel, Inc. (“opposer”) opposed the registration of applicant’s mark on the grounds of likelihood of dilution by blurring under Section 43(c) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c); likelihood of confusion under Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(d); and false suggestion of a connection under Trademark Act Section 2(a),15 U.S.C. § 1152(a). Chanel, Inc., prevailed in this precedential opinion.
Altavion, Inc. v. Konica Minolta Systems Laboratory (Cal. Court of Appeal May 9, 2014) (available here), held that patentable ideas, if kept secret, can constitute information protectable by trade secret law, clearing up confusion created by a 2010 decision (Silvaco Data Systems v. Intel Corp.), which had stated that “[t]rade secret law does not protect ideas as such” and that trade secret protection only extends to information tending to communicate or disclose ideas to another.
All are invited to join us in our discussion during the SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, June 2, 2014 at Noon in our Westlake Village office. This activity is approved for 1 hour of MCLE credit. If you will be joining us, please RSVP to Noelle Smith by 9 am Monday morning.
This sounds great – I won’t be able to attend as I am in DC tomorrow, hopefully being sworn in to practice before the US Supreme Court.