Patent Lawyers
We believe great ideas are infectious, exciting and exhilarating. They bring people together. They embolden and inspire. They create passion and loyalty. And they are worth protecting.

Ideas On Intellectual Property Law February/March 2016

Patterson Thuente IP is pleased to present the February/March 2016 issue of Ideas on Intellectual Property Law. We encourage you to read through it for ideas about ways you can protect your intellectual property.  (more…)

Patterson Thuente IP is pleased to present the February/March 2016 issue of Ideas on Intellectual Property Law. We encourage you to read through it for ideas about ways you can protect your intellectual property.  3925

Puget Bioventures Patent Upheld by Federal Circuit

Patterson Thuente IP and Puget Bioventures were successful at the Federal Circuit with a unique case involving a patent that expired during a PTAB appeal. On January 14, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated an inter partes re-examination decision, upholding some of the claims and affirming validity of other claims in Puget’s patent on knee replacement technology.

(more…)

Patterson Thuente IP and Puget Bioventures were successful at the Federal Circuit with a unique case involving a patent that expired during a PTAB appeal. On January 14, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated an inter partes re-examination decision, upholding some of the claims and affirming validity of other claims in Puget’s patent on knee replacement technology. 3918

Time Out!

Trademark Fails for Lack of Intent to Use

Say you learn that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) has rejected a likelihood of confusion argument made by a party that opposes your trademark application. Time to pop the champagne, right? You’re in the clear!

Not exactly. Or at least this wasn’t the case in the recent decision of M.Z. Berger & Co., Inc. v. Swatch AG. Here, just such a trademark challenge ultimately succeeded because the TTAB and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit eventually concluded that the applicant lacked the requisite “bona fide intent” to use the mark in commerce. (more…)

Trademark Fails for Lack of Intent to Use Say you learn that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) has rejected a likelihood of confusion argument made by a party that opposes your trademark application. Time to pop the champagne, right? You’re in the clear! Not exactly. Or at least this wasn’t the case in the recent decision of M.Z. Berger & Co., Inc. v. Swatch AG. Here, just such a trademark challenge ultimately succeeded because the TTAB and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit eventually concluded that the applicant lacked the requisite “bona fide intent” to use the mark in commerce. 3886