Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

In the world of intellectual property, trademark protection is vital for safeguarding the distinctive signs, logos, and names that distinguish goods or services. Within this landscape, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) plays a significant role as the administrative tribunal responsible for resolving disputes related to trademarks. The TTAB, an arm of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), adjudicates trademark registration issues, opposition proceedings, and cancellation actions, making it crucial for those seeking to protect their trademark rights.

 

Verna Law, P.C., focuses on trademark, patent, copyright, and advertising law.  If you have questions, contact us at 914-908-6757 or send us an e-mail at anthony@vernalaw.com.

 

This article will explore the TTAB’s function, procedures, and relevance in the realm of intellectual property. Whether you’re a trademark owner, an applicant, or a party involved in a trademark dispute, understanding the TTAB is critical for effectively navigating trademark matters.

The Function of the TTAB

The TTAB is an administrative body within the USPTO, designed to handle trademark disputes through proceedings like trademark oppositions and trademark cancellations. It also hears ex parte appeals from applicants who have received refusals on their trademark applications from examining attorneys.

Unlike federal courts, the TTAB does not handle issues related to infringement or award damages. Instead, the board focuses on determining trademark registration eligibility, assessing whether marks are likely to cause confusion, or if they are descriptive or generic. Parties involved in disputes may file for summary judgment or proceed with a full trial within the TTAB’s jurisdiction.

The Process of Trademark Opposition

Once a trademark is published in the Official Gazette, any party who believes that the mark will cause harm may file a Notice of Opposition. This initiates an adversary proceeding, where the opposer and the trademark applicant present their cases to the TTAB. Grounds for opposition may include a likelihood of confusion with an existing mark or issues of dilution if the opposing mark is considered a famous mark.

The opposition proceedings are akin to a civil litigation process but are more streamlined and occur within the TTAB’s electronic system. Both parties exchange evidence, file motions, and, in some cases, attend oral hearings. The TTAB reviews the materials before issuing a written decision. For opposers, submitting notices of reliance is a common method of introducing key documents into the case.

TTAB Cancellation Proceedings

Another primary function of the TTAB is to handle trademark cancellation proceedings, which allow any party to challenge the validity of a registered mark. Like opposition proceedings, cancellations are adversarial in nature and follow similar procedures. Cancellation can be sought on various grounds, such as abandonment, non-use, or fraudulent registration.

Parties involved in these proceedings are often represented by trademark attorneys who have extensive experience in TTAB proceedings. Effective representation can be the difference between maintaining a registration or having it canceled.

Ex Parte Appeals and TTAB Actions

For trademark applicants, the TTAB also handles ex parte appeals. These appeals occur when an applicant’s mark is initially refused by a USPTO examiner, typically for reasons like likelihood of confusion with an existing mark or failure to meet the distinctiveness requirement. The applicant can appeal to the TTAB, which will review the examiner’s decision and issue its final decision.

Applicants have the right to appeal to federal court if dissatisfied with the TTAB’s ruling. However, it’s important to note that TTAB decisions are frequently upheld in federal court, particularly when the board’s reasoning is sound.

Special Proceedings: Concurrent Use and AIA Proceedings

In addition to oppositions and cancellations, the TTAB oversees concurrent use proceedings. These cases involve two parties seeking to use similar trademarks in different geographical areas. The board’s role is to adjudicate these cases and decide whether both parties can coexist without confusing consumers.

There are also AIA proceedings (America Invents Act proceedings), though these are generally more relevant to patents. For trademarks, however, inter partes review proceedings bear some similarities to TTAB actions, providing an avenue to challenge another party’s intellectual property.

The Role of Examining Attorneys and Board Judges

Central to TTAB proceedings are examining attorneys, who initially review trademark applications to ensure compliance with trademark law. If an examining attorney issues a refusal, such as for likelihood of confusion, applicants may appeal the decision to the TTAB.

In both opposition proceedings and cancellation actions, the TTAB comprises a panel of three administrative judges who review the evidence and arguments presented by the parties. These judges are experts in trademark law and are responsible for issuing decisions that align with established legal standards.

Appeals and Further Legal Actions

A trademark applicant or owner dissatisfied with a TTAB decision has the option to file an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or seek review in a federal district court. These appeals often involve more extensive legal arguments and may require an in-depth examination of client’s prior use and third-party marks to establish distinctiveness or overcome objections raised in TTAB proceedings.

Practical Considerations for TTAB Proceedings

Navigating TTAB procedures requires careful attention to deadlines and legal standards. For instance, parties involved in TTAB cases often file motions for extension of time to gather evidence or prepare responses. Failure to adhere to timelines or provide complete information could result in unfavorable rulings. It’s also important to safeguard sensitive information during the application process, ensuring that no confidential data is inadvertently disclosed.

Moreover, TTAB actions are often viewed as cost-effective alternatives to litigation in federal court, but they still require substantial preparation and strategic planning. Whether you’re pursuing a trademark opposition proceeding or defending a registration in trademark cancellation proceedings, understanding the nuances of TTAB procedures and requirements is crucial.

TTAB Resources: Where to Find Useful Information

The official website of the USPTO provides a comprehensive array of resources for those involved in TTAB matters. The TTAB center on the USPTO’s site offers access to case filings, status updates, and procedural guides that are essential for practitioners. Additionally, the federal register documents provide updates on proposed changes to trademark law and procedural rules governing TTAB actions.

For those seeking authoritative guidance on the application of the doctrine of foreign equivalents, service marks, or the trademark act, the official legal edition of the federal register is a valuable tool. Furthermore, the administrative committee of the federal register ensures that users have access to the most up-to-date rulings and decisions affecting trademark law.

Conclusion: Effective Representation in TTAB Proceedings

For businesses and individuals navigating trademark disputes, TTAB proceedings offer a clear path to resolving issues related to trademark registration. With the right legal counsel and a thorough understanding of various rules governing TTAB actions, parties can secure or defend their trademark rights effectively. Whether dealing with opposition proceedings, interference proceedings, or appeals of final decisions, working with a seasoned trademark attorney can provide you with the effective representation you need to succeed.

 

In an increasingly competitive marketplace, protecting your brand through the TTAB’s processes is not only a legal necessity but also a strategic business advantage.

 

Verna Law, P.C., focuses on trademark, patent, copyright, and advertising law.  If you have questions, contact us at 914-908-6757 or send us an e-mail at anthony@vernalaw.com.

 

 

List of cases that Verna Law, P.C. has worked on in the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board:

91294113: Wawa, Inc., Wild Goose Holding Co., Inc.  vs. Youxinhong (Shenzhen) Trading Co., Ltd
92085970: East West Tea Company, LLC  vs. Dynamic Solutions
91291441: Space Exploration Technologies Corp.  vs. Nayshin Company, LLC
91291376: Traxxas, L.P.  vs. Nayshin Company, LLC
91291021: Under Armour, Inc.  vs. Zhongshanshiyiyue Technology Co., Ltd.
91290853: Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.  vs. DR GNP HOLDINGS LLC; Graham, Jennoa R.
91290823: Darren Moore  vs. Live 1 Entertainment
91290611: H & M Hennes & Mauritz AB  vs. Suzhou Xuner Information Technology Co., Ltd.
91290430: Roche Diabetes Care, Inc., Roche Diabetes Care GMBH  vs. Hangzhou Yicare Biotech Co., Ltd
97705210: H & M Hennes & Mauritz AB  vs. Suzhou Xuner Information Technology Co., Ltd.
97514538: Darren Moore  vs. Live 1 Entertainment
91289653: The Professional Golfers’ Association of America  vs. Shenzhen Shangxin Technology Co., LTD.
:    vs.
97815623: Under Armour, Inc.  vs. Zhongshanshiyiyue Technology Co., Ltd.
91289449: The Freedom Expression Corporation  vs. Nguyen Van Diep
91289251: Padel Positive, S.L.  vs. Shijiazhuang Rui Qiao San Yu Trading Co., Ltd
91289256: Rotary International  vs. Chen Guangnan
97710486: Lema S.p.A.  vs. Shenzhenshi qinruikejiyouxiangongsi CO., Ltd
97677454: Roche Diabetes Care, Inc.  vs. Hangzhou Yicare Biotech Co., Ltd
91288542: Los Angeles Trading Company  vs. Shanghai Bodie Trading Co., Ltd
91288475: The Coca-Cola Company  vs. Guangzhou Chao ka Paper Products Co., Ltd.
91288389: Fridababy, LLC  vs. Shanxi Sun Haohao Trading Co., Ltd.
97605512: Box, Inc  vs. HONGKONG TOPSPEED NETWORK LIMITED
97675495: The Coca-Cola Company  vs. Guangzhou Chao ka Paper Products Co., Ltd.
91287983: Chapter 4 Corp.  vs. Li Xiaoxia
97677465: Los Angeles Trading Company  vs. Shanghai Bodie Trading Co., Ltd
91287891: Fullstar Houseware LLC  vs. Chen Xiaomin
91287895: YETI Coolers, LLC  vs. Sha Qiang
91287852: Julius Sämann Ltd.  vs. Anne M.Vogel
97486511: Rotary International  vs. Chen Guangnan
91287366: Parfums Christian Dior  vs. Chen Yanluan
97450485: Christopher Dangler  vs. Friend Spirits, LLC
97451734: Christopher Dangler  vs. Friend Spirits, LLC
91286605: Frame LA Brands, LLC  vs. Moises Salazar
97435166: Fridababy, LLC  vs. Shanxi Sun Haohao Trading Co., Ltd.
92083002: Keisha Alexander  vs. Shay B. Beautiful
91286375: McDonald’s Corporation  vs. Feifei Shao
91285410: Crusader Tactical Limited Liability Company  vs. Texas Precision Ammunition Company
91284913: Anastasia Beverly Hills, LLC  vs. Yvette Royal
97420548: Frame LA Brands, LLC  vs. Moises Salazar
97328157: The TaxProNeur Company LLC  vs. Karla Dennis
97266710: Anastasia Beverly Hills, LLC  vs. Yvette Royal
91278582: Universal Protein Supplements Corporation d/b/a Universal Nutrition    vs. Manimal LLC
90623418: Fusion Orthopedics LLC  vs. Treace Medical Concepts, Inc.
91277148: Garan Services Corp.  vs. Tobacco Motowear Company., Ltd.
91276969: MP Marks, LLC  vs. DeMarcus George
92079690: Platinum GmbH & CO. KG  vs. Nature’s Animals, Inc.
91275875: Lutheran Social Services Of The South, Inc.  vs. UpBring LLC
90701559: MP Marks, LLC  vs. DeMarcus George
92078717: Oana LLC  vs. Top Management, LLC.
92078717: Oana LLC  vs. Top Management, LLC.
92078469: PressTine Marketing Inc.  vs. Richard Gutierrez
91271732: Bridal Concierge, LLC  vs. N779LB, LLC DBA Maui Flying Dress Experience
92077118: Bios Labs, LLC  vs. Bios Institute, LLC
90135563: Shift Employment Law Training, LLC d/b/a Shift HR Compliance Training    vs. Shift/Co, PBC
91268281: Box, Inc.  vs. 0chain, LLC
91267689: Ecobee Inc.  vs. eco plus rewards LLC
91267541: UBreakIFix, Co.  vs. Alberto A. Cruz
91266799: Football Northwest LLC and NFL Properties LLC  vs. PBTM LLC
91266385: Chanel, Inc.  vs. Natural Allure LLC
92075781: Agbanga Karite, Inc. dba Alaffia  vs. Annette M. Wright
92075106: Ocean Gold LLC  vs. Cakez Mag, Llc
91264515: Football Northwest LLC and NFL Properties LLC  vs. PBTM LLC
91256254: NFL Properties LLC, Football Northwest LLC  vs. PBTM LLC
91256255: NFL Properties LLC, Football Northwest LLC  vs. PBTM LLC
91256584: NFL Properties LLC and Football Northwest LLC  vs. PBTM LLC
91255637: Seattle Pacific Industries, Inc.  vs. Brittnay D. Cotton
91255541: Hugo Boss Trade Mark Management GmbH & Co KG  vs. Brittnay D. Cotton
92073165: RGY Floral Services Inc.  vs. New Life Worship Center, Inc.
91252600: Verify Him, LLC  vs. Jessica Lanning
91252218: Football Northwest LLC and NFL Properties LLC  vs. PBTM LLC
91251641: America In Harms Way DBA Keep America Great!  vs. Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.
91251159: Council of Ivy Group Presidents  vs. Eric Chau Eng dba IvyCollegeAdmit
92072109: Global Payments Inc.  vs. Global Digital Payment
91250331: Dr. Samer Choksi  vs. JetMedicalTourism LLC
88300689: Dr. Samer Choksi  vs. JetMedicalTourism LLC
91249220: Peanuts Worldwide LLC  vs. Teenie Peanuts
91248984: Only The Best, Inc.  vs. Heidi Brinkley
91248907: Johnson Law Firm, P.A.  vs. Fairwell LLC
91248423: Green Medical Marketing LLC  vs. Michael A. Snavely
92071370: Green Bellies Holding Corporation  vs. Greenbelly LLC
88222080: Vifor (International) AG (Vifor (International) Ltd.) (Vifor (International) Inc.)  vs. Wellforia Health Inc.
91247973: TrueCar, Inc.  vs. Jiang, Haipeng
91247239: Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company  vs. 1St Nationwide Mortgage Corporation
88134311: Johnson Law Firm, P.A.  vs. Fairwell LLC
87699748: Benjamin Kapelushnik  vs. Terrance Blackman
91246528: Branded LLC  vs. Goat Bros Hockey, LLC
91246302: YETI Coolers, LLC  vs. Yetiville
91246000: Industria de Diseno Textil, S.A. (Inditex, S.A.)  vs. Benzara Inc.
91245007: Mr Daniel B Cichlar Jr  vs. Phibian Gear, Inc.
91244577: The Wonderful Company LLC  vs. SMF Fitness & Nutrition LLC dba Food Wonderful
92069862: Mr. Aman Maini  vs. New Age Imports, Inc.
91244315: Patron Spirits International AG  vs. The Pickled Pirate, LLC
91242880: Industria de Diseno Textil, S.A. (Inditex, S.A.)  vs. Benzara Inc.
87764543: Patron Spirits International AG  vs. The Pickled Pirate, LLC
91242516: Mark L. Eldridge  vs. James Lewis
91240577: Victoria’s Secret Stores Brand Management, Inc.  vs. Victoria Johnson
92068246: Hat World, Inc.  vs. Live Lids
91225523: Verde Ridge Homeowners Association, Inc.  vs. Bonnie Alicea
91238280: Andre Young  vs. DeAndre T. Dymski
91237917: Brainlink International, Inc.  vs. CloudBrain Inc.
87003582: Brainlink International, Inc.  vs. CloudBrain Inc.
87313749: Cory T Elliott  vs. Pura Naturals Inc
91236593: Columbia Insurance Company  vs. Edgar Matanguihan Chavez
92066738: Wuno Inc.  vs. Ezzat G. Bakhoum
91236196: Eagle Creek, Inc.  vs. Tracee E. Lawson
92066601: Swindlers Ridge Distillery LLC  vs. Arnot-Roberts LLC
92066671: Swindlers Ridge Distillery LLC  vs. Societe Brewing Company, LLC
91234503: GFBC, Inc.  vs. A Sun Down Enterprise, LLC DBA Sun Up Brewing Company
91233010: Voxx International Corporation  vs. PBMI LLC
91232744: IMG Universe, LLC  vs. Melisa Martin