LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > Politics

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 217
0 members and 217 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 04:16 AM.
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 06-19-2024, 07:27 PM   #11
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 86,149
Re: Fuckshitup

Quote:
Originally Posted by LessinSF View Post
Hank, your field gets all the fun cases. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://business.cch.com/ipld/InreGatsbyTTAB20240607.pdf
The Nanny State of this aspect of Trademark law is silly. But yes, it would be fun to be on this file. The best argument the applicant has is that SHIT is shown as bolder on their specimen. I'd refile as a design mark with that emphasized. The TTAB relied upon that to support the refusal but I'd turn it back on them. FWIW I think this will be reversed.

I've never had the pleasure of being on anything like this one. The best I've had is the Kafkaesque Patent Appeals Board matter focusing on whether an "-" in an obscure 1975 Japanese language technical document was a hyphen or a negative sign. With a dep at GGG's law office! RIP

The next would be a patent lawsuit with two patents. Convention is to refer to them by the last three numbers, one was '565 which was more important. The other was '420. At argument I focused on '565, but then ask the Judge "may I move on to '420?" Corny but a fun little thing.
__________________
I will not suffer a fool- but I do seem to read a lot of their posts
Hank Chinaski is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:11 AM.