Intellectual Property Law Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Trademark attorney Philadelphia’

Inter Partes Reviews – A Brief Primer, Recent Supreme Court Rulings, and the USPTO’s Notice of Proposed Changes

May 21st, 2018

Inter partes reviews (IPRs) were enacted on September 16, 2012, as part of the America Invents Act (AIA) passed by Congress.

Read more

The Whats and Whys of IP Audits

April 12th, 2018

An IP audit is a systematic examination and verification of a company’s intellectual property assets and an analysis of strengths and threats. A company’s IP assets may be invaluable.

Read more

Why Enroll Your Trademark in the Amazon Brand Registry?

March 15th, 2018

Selling on Amazon is nearly ubiquitous, so it’s imperative to protect your brand – your trademark – across the platform. Amazon has made it easier to do so by overhauling its Brand Registry last year and creating, in their own words, “an accurate and trusted experience for customers.” As a brand owner, you must have a dual focus on strengthening and protecting your brand while also engaging and serving your customers. The Amazon Brand Registry supports this dual focus.

Read more

Here Comes the Rush to Trademark ‘Philly Special’

February 28th, 2018

One of the Philadelphia Eagles Super Bowl victory’s most memorable moments witnessed was a gutsy play that the team called the “Philly Special.” It was one of the boldest calls in Super Bowl history, and it has inspired some bold moves at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), as well. As the term “Philly Special” has spread like wildfire through Eagles’ fandom, quick-thinking entrepreneurs have raced to capitalize on it, filing trademark applications to secure the rights to those golden words.

Read more

2017 Supreme Court and Federal Circuit IP Year in Review

December 27th, 2017

Throughout 2017, Panitch Schwarze has carefully watched key intellectual property disputes at the U.S. Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). The following 2017 cases will impact the protection of intellectual property in the United States.

Read more

Panitch Schwarze Partner Collaborates with IP Lawyers in Australia and New Zealand

October 18th, 2017

In August, I embarked on a trip to Australia and New Zealand to visit several colleagues with whom the firm has worked on patent and trademark matters for the mutual benefit of clients to both their countries and the U.S.

Read more

Don’t Fall For It! Trademark Scams and Misleading Notices

August 25th, 2017

Once you submit your application to register a trademark with the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO), the application becomes part of a public record. That means your name and contact information can be accessed by anyone searching the records of the USPTO.

Read more

Recognizing Inventor Howard Head

July 7th, 2017

Try as he might, tall and lanky Howard Head never could claim to be truly proficient at the sports he loved. But he could say that he changed them forever. As he explained it when I first met him, he was a frustrated weekend athlete, and he thought that his frustration was linked to the equipment available.

Read more

SCOTUS Rules Trademark Disparagement Clause Unconstitutional

June 22nd, 2017

The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that the U.S. Trademark Office’s refusal to register “The Slants” as a trademark for an Oregon-based rock band was unconstitutional. This is a case the trademark attorneys at Panitch Schwarze have been watching closely, as this landmark decision could reshape U.S. trademark law significantly.

Read more

Trademarks Update: Supreme Court to Decide Constitutionality of Disparagement Provision

October 20th, 2016

The U.S. Supreme Court is poised to answer a question that has plagued federal trademark law for decades: Does the government have the right to refuse to register trademarks which it has deemed “disparaging?” And, given that the First Amendment prohibits our government from restricting speech, does it make sense to have the U.S. Trademark Office approve or deny trademark registrations on grounds that may limit speech?

Read more

Email Disclaimer

Sending an email to our office does not create an attorney-client relationship, and none will be formed unless there is an expressed agreement between the firm and the client. Thus, we strongly advise against sending confidential or privileged information to us until you can establish such a relationship. Furthermore, we advise against sending privileged or confidential information through email at all, since we can in no way ensure the security of your email. In fact, neither this website nor the email system involved is encrypted, so you should not assume that your email is confidential. We cannot guarantee that someone else will not see it.

Do you agree to this Email Disclaimer?

I Agree I Do Not Agree