 |
| (click to enlarge) |
You’re an administrative judge with the TTAB. The entity with the logo second from the left on the bottom of the poster owns a registration for “ATL’s Baddest Chicks.” The entity with the logo on the left, the domain name “www.littelconcepts.net” and the phone number 404-607-8772 claims to be the owner of the mark. This is the only piece of evidence in the case. Who wins? Answer here (it’s a no-brainer – mostly a lesson in why one needs a thing called “evidence”).
Practice note: There is a lovely summary of the elements of a claim that an application was fraudulent because there was a senior mark: “the party alleging fraud must plead and prove that: (1) there was in fact another user (petitioner, here) of the same or a confusingly similar mark at the time the oath was signed; (2) the other user had legal rights superior to applicant’s; (3) applicant knew that the other user had rights in the mark superior to applicant’s, and either believed that a likelihood of confusion would result from applicant’s use of its mark or had no reasonable basis for believing otherwise; and that (4) applicant, in failing to disclose these facts to the Patent and Trademark Office, intended to procure a registration to which it was not entitled.”
The text of this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
