By way of follow-up to Tim’s and David’s recent discussions about Rio2016 and related U.S. Olympic Committee trademark enforcement issues, it appears that a local Minnesota carpet cleaning business called Zerorez, is poised to press the issue of the USOC’s overreaching trademark policies by asking the federal district court in Minnesota to confirm it

Lately we’ve been discussing more and more the difference between the right to register a trademark and the right to use a trademark. In many trademark disputes the perfect forum for an amicable resolution is the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) of the USPTO.

The TTAB can be a cost effective forum for parties

Trademark fraud claims aren’t going away, despite the fact that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) has not found fraud in a single trademark opposition or cancellation since the Federal Circuit decided In re Bose in 2009, rejecting the prior “knew or should have known” standard in favor of the much more difficult

German-based Puma S.E. brought a trademark infringement lawsuit — based on the similarity of the cat logos — against Minnesota-based Arctic Cat, in the Northern District of Illinois at the end of last year (copy of complaint is here).

As we have written about before, sometimes the substance and merits of a

NeoCon is North America’s largest design exposition and conference where thousands of innovative products and resources are showcased for corporate, hospitality, healthcare, retail, government, institutional and residential interiors from more than 700 showrooms and exhibitors. NeoCon 2012 begins next Monday at The Merchandise Mart in Chicago.

Thanks to District Court Judge Joan Ericksen of the

About a week ago another interesting federal intellectual property case was filed in the District of Minnesota: Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. v. Puffin Software et al.

Although the four count complaint includes a federal unfair competition claim, a Minnesota deceptive trade practices claim, and a common law unjust enrichment claim, the case really appears to be centered around the copyright