FAME: Here today, not tomorrow.

Opposer, Fruit of the Loom, Inc., owns numerous trademark registrations for its FRUIT OF THE LOOM trademark for clothing, and specifically for underwear.   Applicants filed a trademark application for BODY FRUIT for several clothing items, including undergarments. Opposer filed a Notice of Opposition and, not surprisingly, convinced the TTAB to sustain the opposition in […]

Adding a House Mark to a secondary brand similar to someone else’s mark can either increase OR decrease likelihood of confusion depending upon the circumstances.

Applicant, International Intimates Inc., filed for a trademark application for KISS KISS BY INTERNATIONAL INTIMATES INC. for clothing, including undergarments, lingerie and sleepwear. The application was rejected based on U.S. Trademark Registration No. 3434337 for the mark QISS QISS for clothing, including lingerie and sleepwear.  The TTAB affirmed the refusal. The first argument Applicant lost

Word mark registrations TRUMP stylized versions; and there really are 3 for 1 specials in trademark law for clothing.

Applicant applied for the following mark incorporating the stylized letters “DF”: for a variety of clothing items.  The application was refused registration because of the existence of United States Trademark Registration No. 2827030 for the word mark DF, also for a variety of clothing items, with some overlap with the refused application.  The TTAB affirmed […]

Applicant’s ENDORPHIN HIGH expires when he crashes into existing registration.

Applicant filed for a trademark application for ENDORPHINS for “hats; sweatshirts; t-shirts; tank tops.”  (Seriously,…does anyone wear tank tops anymore?) The application was rejected based on U.S. Trademark Registration No. 3927040 for the mark shown below: for a variety of clothing items including hats and t-shirts.  The TTAB affirmed the refusal. While this is a […]

Fashion Industry May be Left Defenseless Against Infringers

Fashion designers could be left defenseless against copycats if the US Supreme Court rules that certain features are not protected under the Copyright Act.  The Supreme Court will soon hear oral argument in Varsity Brands, Inc. v. Star Athletica, LLC.  At issue is what, according to Petitioner Star Athletica, LLC, is “the most vexing, unresolved […]

Deceptive marks always start off with two strikes against them.

Applicant applied for the mark BLAZING SILKS for a variety of clothing products.  Applicant also made clear that its products were not made from silk.   FIRST STRIKE:  Had Applicant’s products been made from silk, the USPTO would have deemed the word “silk” to be merely descriptive and would have required Applicant disclaim “silk” apart […]