Intellectual Property Law
New Matter SPRING 2022, VOLUME 47, EDITION 1
Content
- 2022 New Matter Author Submission Guidelines
- Andy Warhol Foundation V. Goldsmith Redux
- Biogen Ma Inc. V. Emd Serono, Inc.
- INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTION Executive Committee 2021-2022
- INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTION Interest Group Representatives 2021-2022
- INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTION New Matter Editorial board
- Letter From the Chair
- Letter From the Editor-in-chief
- McLe Trademark Law's Protection For Image and Likeness ... At Least If You're Famous
- Miramax's Lawsuit Against Quentin Tarantino May Set Precedent For Classification of Nfts
- Ninth Circuit Report
- Online Cle For Participatory Credit
- Quarterly International Ip Law Update
- Table of Contents
- The California Lawyers Association Intellectual Property Alumni
- The Licensing Corner
- Trade Secret Report
- Ttab Decisions and Developments
- A Look At the Trademark Modernization Act - One Year In
A LOOK AT THE TRADEMARK MODERNIZATION ACT – ONE YEAR IN
AUTHORS
Jane Shay Wald
Irell & Manella LLP
Michael Tezyan
Irell & Manella LLP
In the second article of this three part-series on the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 ("TMA"),1 we discussed the proposed TMA implementing rules and the public comments to them, as well as an early round-up of judicial application of the rebuttable presumption of irreparable harm under 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a). The final rules went into effect on December 27, 2021. The USPTO appeared careful to take into account the public comments of law firm and in-house practitioners, and legal associations, including the American Bar Association, the International Trademark Association, and the American Intellectual Property Law Association. The final implementing rules reflect the public’s concerns regarding philosophy and practice under the new expungement and reexamination procedures.