Intellectual Property Law
New Matter SUMMER 2017 Volume 42, Number 2
Content
- 2017 New Matter Author Submission Guidelines
- Case Comments
- Contents
- Copyright Commentary
- Federal Circuit Report
- Federal Government Expands Public Disclosure Requirements For Clinical Trials: Product Developers Must Publish More Detailed Information, Study Protocols, and the Results of Studies of Unapproved/Unmarketed Products
- Intellectual Property Section Executive Committee 2016-2017
- Intellectual Property Section Interest Group Representatives 2016-2017
- Ip and Art: An International Perspective
- Letter from the Chair
- Letter from the Editor-in-Chief
- Ninth Circuit Report
- Online Cle For Participatory Credit
- Standing Still: Denial of Certiorari in Belmora Llc v. Bayer Consumer Care Ag Leaves Question on Standing for Foreign Plaintiff's Unfair Competition Claims
- The Band Who Must Not Be Named: Summary of Briefs and Oral Hearing in Lee v. Tam
- The Licensing Corner
- The State Bar of California Intellectual Property Alumni
- Ttab Decisions and Developments
TTAB Decisions and Developments
JANE SHAY WALD
Irell & Manella LLP
REVIEW OF PRECEDENTIAL TTAB CASES FIRST QUARTER 2017
Under the Board Rules Old and New, This Potential Opposition Was Untimely and Defective and Gone
Potential Opposer received a first 30-day extension of time to Oppose, giving a deadline of February 4, 2017 to file a Notice of Opposition. Alternatively, it could have electronically filed to show good cause and pay the fee for an additional 60 days, as required by the TTAB rules in effect as of January 14, 2017. Since that date was a Saturday, compliance on Monday, February 6, 2017 would have been timely for either approach per Trademark Rule 2.196.