Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

TTAB Decisions Past: Will They Come Back to Haunt You in Federal Court?

By Andrea L. Calvaruso

When a dispute arises between parties regarding the use and registrability of a trademark, counsel often must weigh the facts and circumstances to advise a client whether it would be best to commence an action in the PTO's Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) or file suit in federal court. In some cases however, counsel will find a client in the midst of a TTAB proceeding ' or worse ' after an unfavorable decision has been rendered against the client in an opposition or cancellation proceeding. In such situations, counsel must assess what preclusive effect, if any, the prior administrative decision may have in a subsequent trademark infringement action in federal district court.

As an initial matter, a distinction must be drawn between the doctrines of issue preclusion and claim preclusion. Issue preclusion, sometimes referred to as collateral estoppel, prevents parties from relitigating issues that were actually raised, tried and decided in a previous action. The majority of jurisdictions, including the Second Circuit, have held that issue preclusion is applicable where: 1) the issue decided in the prior adjudication was identical to the issue presented in the second action; 2) the first adjudication resulted in a final judgment on the merits; 3) the party against whom the claim is asserted was either a party, or in privity with a party, to the prior adjudication; and 4) the party against whom the claim is asserted had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issues in the prior adjudication. See J. McCarthy, Trademarks and Unfair Competition, '32:84 (4th Ed. 2004); Levy v. Kosher Overseers Assoc. of America, Inc., 104 F.3d 38, 41 (2d Cir. 1996).

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Beach Boys Songs Written Decades Ago Triggered Current Quarrel With Lawyers Image

There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Transfer Tax Implications on Real Property Leases Image

The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.