The U.S. Supreme Court has reversed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s 2022 decision in Vidal v. Elster, which held the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) application of Section 2(c) of the Lanham Act to reject the mark TRUMP TOO SMALL was unconstitutional. The High Court today held that the Lanham Act’s names clause does not violate the First Amendment. While all of the justices agreed that the names clause does not violate the First Amendment, they differed on the proper analysis to reach that conclusion.
Recent Posts
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, November 8: Judge Dismisses Copyright Lawsuit Against OpenAI Filed by News Outlets; Reports Finds Record Number of Global Patent Filings; ITC Finds Semiconductor Company Infringed on Competitor’s Patent
- How Bayh-Dole Supporters Made a Successful Goal Line Stand
- How Recent Patent Damages Precedent May Increase Reasonable Royalty Awards
- The Judge Newman Story in Her Own Words: IPWatchdog Unleashed
- Please Don’t Call Me a ‘Genus’: The High Bar for Section 112 in the Unpredictable Arts as Illustrated by In re Xencor