Intellectual Property Law
New Matter SUMMER 2017, Volume 41, Number 3
Content
- 2016 New Matter Author Submission Guidelines
- Case Comments
- Contents
- Copyright Commentary
- Enhanced Patent Damages: the "Halo Effect"
- Federal Circuit Report
- Intellectual Property Section Executive Committee 2015-2016
- Intellectual Property Section Interest Group Representatives 2015-2016
- International Ip Developments
- Letter from the Chair
- Letter from the Editor-in-Chief
- Lynne Beresford 1942-2016
- MCLE Self-Study Article
- Ninth Circuit Report
- Online Cle For Participatory Credit
- The Licensing Corner
- The Meaning Behind Moral Rights Waiver Language in Contracts in the United States
- The State Bar of California Intellectual Property Alumni
- Ttab Decisions and Developments
TTAB Decisions and Developments
Jane Shay Wald
Irell & Manella LLP
OK TO ADD NEW CLAIM TO PENDING PETITION TO CANCEL INCONTESTABLE REGISTRATION
Petition to cancel was filed before the subject registration was five years old. After the registration was five years old, the Petition was still pending. Petitioner, owner of the Valvoline trademark, sought to amend the petition to cancel Respondent’s two Maxoline marks to add a new count, non-use of the trademark. Respondent urged that since "non-use" was not one of the Section 14 exceptions to cancel an incontestable trademark registration, the Petitioner could no longer amend the Petition to Cancel. The Board, after a thorough analysis of the case law and public policy, disagreed.