Contributor Page
Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
 
Email  |  Website  |  Articles
Contact Details
Tel: +1 617 646 8000
Fax: +1 617 646 8646
600 Atlantic Avenue
Boston
MA 02210
United States
By John L. Welch
The Board dismissed this petition for cancellation of Roman Atwood's registration for the mark SMILE MORE for various goods (stickers, backpacks, shirts) and for retail store service featuring clothing, denying petitioner's claim that the term fails to function as a mark.
By John L. Welch
This guest post was written by Stephanie Grace Stella, an associate in the Trademark Group at Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
By John L. Welch
White Horse Wash opposed the application of White Horse Auto to register the mark WHITE HORSE AUTO for automobile dealerships [AUTO disclaimed], claiming a likelihood of confusion with opposer's mark WHITE HORSE AUTO WASH for "automobile and vehicle washing; automobile and vehicle detailing" [AUTO WASH disclaimed].
By John L. Welch
Balancing the relevant duPont factors, the Board found confusion likely and it sustained the opposition.
By John L. Welch
[This guest post was written by Kira-Khanh McCarthy, a 2L at University of Notre Dame Law School].
By John L. Welch
The Board affirmed a Section 2(e)(1) refusal to register the mark CREATINE GUMMIES, finding it to be merely descriptive of "Dietary and nutritional supplements containing creatine" [GUMMIES disclaimed].
By Maximilian Tang, James Hanifin Jr.
When considering intellectual property protection, businesses often overlook the value of design patents and trade dress rights.
By John L. Welch
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (T-T-A-B, not Tee-tab) has scheduled three (III) oral hearings for the month of February 2019.
By John L. Welch
Finding that the term #MAGICNUMBER108 fails to function as a trademark for shirts, the TTAB affirmed a refusal to register under Sections 1, 2, and 45 of the Lanham Act.
By John L. Welch
Here are three recent Board decisions in Section 2(d) appeals. I'm not giving any hints, so you're on your own, buddy.
By Kevin R. Mosier
This past year, the Supreme Court in SAS Institute v. Iancu held that once the PTAB institutes an IPR trial its subsequent final written decision must address all claims challenged in the petition.
By John L. Welch
Finding that the mark TSA-KIT for "bottles, sold empty," falsely suggests a connection with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Transportation Security Administration ...
By Stuart Duncan Smith, Kevin R. Mosier
Section 311(b) of the America Invents Act ("AIA") provides that a petitioner for inter partes review ("IPR") may request cancellation of one or more claims of a patent ...
By Nathan R. Speed
One strategy that a patent owner can pursue in an IPR trial is to file a motion to amend seeking to replace one or more of the challenged claims with substitute claims that neither enlarge the scope of the claims nor introduce new subject matter.
By John L. Welch
That's an affirmance rate of 91.3%, or slightly more than 9 out of 10.