Blog

While KAHWA is the name of a specific type of traditional Kashmiri green tea from Central Asia, there was “no record evidence of any café or coffee shop in the United States ever selling kahwa, a specific type of Kashmiri green tea.” 

While the specification teaches various criteria “may be relevant to the analysis of which nodes or routes are best, but it does not explain which factors ought to be considered or how to balance them.” Citing Interval Licensing, 766 F.3d at 1373, the Court held that this did not provide “a reasonably clear and exclusive definition” of “optimal” or “best,” emphasizing the need for the measure to be “exclusive.” 

How can plaintiffs plead, discover, and prove whether a trade secret has been misappropriated without giving away the trade secret? On the other hand, how can defendants respond to discovery without giving away their own trade secrets? Requiring too much disclosure too early could encourage fishing expeditions. Requiring too little disclosure too late could prevent the parties from proving or defending their claims.

In Canatex Completion Solutions, Inc. v. Wellmatics, LLC, No. 2024-1466, __ F.4th __ (Fed. Cir. Nov. 12, 2025), the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s holding of indefiniteness, and instead held that an obvious claim error may be corrected by a court through claim construction where the error is evident on the face of the patent and only one reasonable correction exists. 

in an ex parte appeal involving a trademark application and the time for filing a request for reconsideration has lapsed, the only way to make a new video of record is to file a written request to the TTAB for remand with a showing of good cause prior to the deadline for filing an applicant's main appeal brief

While Applicant’s DRAGONSLAYER mark is nearly identical to the component term “DRAGON SLAYERS” in the registered mark, the TTAB also found that registered mark is “a much busier mark.” 

the specification consistently indicates that claim 1’s “outer frame” is a “self-expanding frame.”

the prosecution history for a subsequent continuation application can apply to the claims of an already issued patent that is related as part of the same patent family

Zesty Paws had argued that its “#1 Claims” had compared the Zesty Paws brand to only the individual brands of pet supplements that Nutramax sells.

reducing a jury award of $10 million for patent infringement to nominal damages of $1 was affirmed because “the jury received insufficient evidence from which it could apportion the lump sum payment in the [allegedly comparable multi-patent] license or otherwise reasonably infer a reasonable royalty award for infringement of the [patent-in-suit] alone.” 

TTAB dismissed an opposition to the applied-for mark MANE ESTEEM for hair care products and hair salon services, based on the registered mark MANE 'N TAIL for hair care products for humans and domestic animals, because of the weakness of the term "MANE" and the dissimilarities in the marks at issue

The Federal Circuit found that the TTAB's “analysis was legally flawed.” Because the TTAB had found that “banking and financing services” and “credit card services” were “highly similar” for the second DuPont factor, excluding third-party uses related to banking and financing services other than credit card services “was an error.”

“there is no correct pronunciation of a trademark, and consumers may pronounce a mark differently than intended by the brand owner.”

The Board’s reasoning sounds in fact very much as though it has taken an “I know it when I see it” approach to failure-to-function refusals.

“Cox did nothing more than assign IP addresses and provide an Internet connection to its 29 subscribers who allegedly engaged in copyright infringement,” so the quashing of the § 512(h) subpoena was affirmed. 

In Quintara Biosciences Inc. v. Ruifeng Biztech Inc., No. 23-16093, __ F.4th __ (9th Cir. Aug. 12, 2025), Quintara asserted a DTSA claim for misappropriation of trade secrets, but no CUTSA claims.

even a "rather simple mechanical invention" for selectorized dumbbells is patent eligible. Rather than merely claiming a broad concept of automating a known technique, it recited a sufficiently “specific manner of performing” automated weight stacking, namely using an electric motor to move weights mechanically. 

Ocean Blue’s act of selling the product on Amazon did not impliedly represent anything about the identity of the party selling the product to Ocean Blue or of that seller’s contractual responsibilities to the manufacturer of the supplements. Because there was no allegation that a misleading statement was made to consumers by Ocean Blue because it omitted material information, there wsa no false statement to consumers, literal or implied.

On appeal to the Eastern District of Viginia, however, Apple submitted new evidence, including four expert reports, that led the district court to a different conclusion from the TTAB, namely that the REALITY COMPOSER and REALITY CONVERTER marks instead "are both suggestive and have acquired secondary meaning." 

In Sazerac Brands, LLC v. Buffalo City Distillery, LLC, Cancellation No. 92079064 (TTAB July 31, 2025), the TTAB found that “alcoholic beverages except beers; distilled spirits” for the BUFFALO CITY trademark registration subject to cancellation was broad enough to encompass “bourbon” identified as the goods for the asserted BUFFALO TRACE trademark registration.

Having "culled all such references from the common specification," neither “stable” nor “stability,” nor any variation thereof, appear anywhere in the common specification. The non-provisional patent applications that matured into the asserted patents did not simply carry over and maintain the same specification from the earlier-filed provisional application.

NFTs are "goods" protectable by trademark law under the Lanham Act. Yuga Labs, LLC v. Ryder Ripps, No. 24-879, 2025 WL 2056060 (9th Cir. July 23, 2025). 

Recreating an animated version of a West Hollywood bar with references to drag queens and cocktails is artistically relevant to the plot and social commentary of Q-Force. The alleged use of Vox’s likeness is an artistic choice that supports the show’s theme and geographic setting, and as discussed above, grounds the scene in a sense of realism. 

Having presented an alternate non-patent ground for the requested recoupment remedy, the asserted patent-law issue thus was not “necessarily raised.”

The word “the” often plays little to no importance for purposes of distinguishing otherwise similar trademarks; but this proposition “is not universally true.”