On Sunday, December 27th, President Trump signed into law the Consolidated Appropriations Act for 2021. As part of the legislation, the Trademark Modernization Act (TMA) was passed as well. The TMA imposes several significant changes on US trademark law. The TMA is the most sweeping trademark legislation in decades and has several important features that trademark and business owners should note.
Two of the changes provide new and apparently more efficient tools for cleaning up the federal trademark register. First, the TMA allows third parties to initiate ex parte procedures (expungement or re-examination) to remove trademark registrations for marks that were never in proper use. This will allow persons and entities pursuing registration of their legitimate marks to clear out (1) zombie registrations for marks that are no longer in use and (2) faulty registrations for marks that were never properly in use. In particular, these tools will allow deserving trademark holders to remove foreign priority applications (Section 44 applications) that often create barriers to registration for domestic trademark applicants. Section 44 registrations do not require demonstration of use in commerce, and frequently include long lists of goods or services that will probably never be offered in marketplace. The TMA provides tools to address these unfortunate side effects of foreign-based registrations.
Second, the TMA allows third parties to intervene and submit evidence in a pending application to demonstrate that the application should be refused (e.g., because it is confusingly similar to intervener’s mark). This will allow those with legitimate prior rights to (1) intervene in a third party’s attempt to register a confusingly similar mark and (2) perhaps avoid the expense and delay of a formal opposition proceeding at the Trademark Trial and Appeals Board (TTAB).
Additionally, the TMA strengthens the legitimate trademark holder’s ability to police and enforce its rights by making injunctive relief more attainable. The TMA establishes a rebuttable presumption that a meritorious trademark plaintiff has sustained irreparable harm. This reverses a trend established by the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in eBay v. MercExchange, 547 U.S. 388 (2006). Since the eBay case, it has become challenging for trademark plaintiffs to obtain an injunction. Under the TMA, plaintiffs who have successfully proven infringement or have demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits, will have an easier path to permanent and/or preliminary injunctions. This will increase the value and protection of trademark registrations and trademark rights generally, as the trademark holder will have much improved prospects of shutting down infringing use.
Finally, the TMA gives the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office director "the authority to reconsider, and modify or set aside, a decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board." This change heads off a constitutional challenge to the appointment process for TTAB administrative law judges (ALJs) based on the Federal Circuit's decision in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2019). In Arthrex, the Federal Circuit found that the appointment of Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) ALJs by the Secretary of Commerce is unconstitutional because the PTAB ALJs are principal officers under the Appointments Clause. Principal officers must be appointed by the President. The Arthrex case is currently pending before the Supreme Court.
Sierra IP Law will advise and assist its clients in utilizing the new tools provided by the TMA to challenge unwarranted and abandoned trademark filings.
© 2020 Sierra IP Law. The information provided herein is not intended to be legal advice, but merely conveys general information that may be beneficial to the legal professional community, and should not be viewed as a substitute for legal consultation in a particular case.
"Mark and William are stellar in the capabilities, work ethic, character, knowledge, responsiveness, and quality of work. Hubby and I are incredibly grateful for them as they've done a phenomenal job working tirelessly over a time span of at least five years on a series of patents for hubby. Grateful that Fresno has such amazing patent attorneys! They're second to none and they never disappoint. Thank you, Mark, William, and your entire team!!"
Linda Guzman
Sierra IP Law, PC - Patents, Trademarks & Copyrights
FRESNO
7030 N. Fruit Ave.
Suite 110
Fresno, CA 93711
(559) 436-3800 | phone
BAKERSFIELD
1925 G. Street
Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661) 200-7724 | phone
SAN LUIS OBISPO
956 Walnut Street, 2nd Floor
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(805) 275-0943 | phone
SACRAMENTO
180 Promenade Circle, Suite 300
Sacramento, CA 95834
(916) 209-8525 | phone
MODESTO
1300 10th St., Suite F.
Modesto, CA 95345
(209) 286-0069 | phone
SANTA BARBARA
414 Olive Street
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
(805) 275-0943 | phone
SAN MATEO
1650 Borel Place, Suite 216
San Mateo, CA, CA 94402
(650) 398-1644. | phone
STOCKTON
110 N. San Joaquin St., 2nd Floor
Stockton, CA 95202
(209) 286-0069 | phone
PORTLAND
425 NW 10th Ave., Suite 200
Portland, OR 97209
(503) 343-9983 | phone
TACOMA
1201 Pacific Avenue, Suite 600
Tacoma, WA 98402
(253) 345-1545 | phone
KENNEWICK
1030 N Center Pkwy Suite N196
Kennewick, WA 99336
(509) 255-3442 | phone
2023 Sierra IP Law, PC - Patents, Trademarks & Copyrights - All Rights Reserved - Sitemap Privacy Lawyer Fresno, CA - Trademark Lawyer Modesto CA - Patent Lawyer Bakersfield, CA - Trademark Lawyer Bakersfield, CA - Patent Lawyer San Luis Obispo, CA - Trademark Lawyer San Luis Obispo, CA - Trademark Infringement Lawyer Tacoma WA - Internet Lawyer Bakersfield, CA - Trademark Lawyer Sacramento, CA - Patent Lawyer Sacramento, CA - Trademark Infringement Lawyer Sacrament CA - Patent Lawyer Tacoma WA - Intellectual Property Lawyer Tacoma WA - Trademark lawyer Tacoma WA - Portland Patent Attorney - Santa Barbara Patent Attorney - Santa Barbara Trademark Attorney