Contributor Page
Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
 
Email  |  Website  |  Articles
Contact Details
Tel: +1 617 646 8000
Fax: +1 617 646 8646
600 Atlantic Avenue
Boston
MA 02210
United States
By John L. Welch
With the recent ascendance of Elizabeth A. Dunn and Christen M. English to TTAB judgeships, the departure of Benjamin U. Okeke
By John L. Welch
The USPTO is seeking applications for the position of Administrative Trademark Judge at the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. The announcement is open until
By John L. Welch
In a 69-page decision, the Board granted a petition for cancellation of registrations for the mark MAXVOLINE
By John L. Welch
Those obnoxious Chicago Cubs are back again, this time successfully opposing an application to register the mark CUBNOXIOUS for "shirts."
By John L. Welch
The Board shot down yet another attempt to show that beer and other alcoholic beverages are not related,
By John L. Welch
After nearly six years, I am updating the TTABlog collection of Section 2(a) false connection cases.
By John L. Welch
Opposer Joyce K. Thomas tossed up an air ball in this opposition to register the mark WINDY CITY GROOVE & Design for "Entertainment in the nature of basketball games;
By John L. Welch
The USPTO refused registration of the mark ARKIVE for document and data services, finding the mark to be merely descriptive under Section 2(e)(1).
By John L. Welch
The USPTO refused registration of the mark ACTTRA, finding it likely to cause confusion with the registered mark ACTARA
By John L. Welch
In a rare inter partes proceeding involving Section 2(c), the Board dismissed an opposition to registration of the mark MANIKCHAND for "snuff."
By John L. Welch
The Board affirmed a refusal to register HERE FOR THE GIRLS for "Charitable services, namely, providing emotional support services for improvement of young womens [sic]
By Michelle Nyein, Michael J. Pomianek
A recent Supreme Court decision could have a significant impact on medical device manufacturers. These companies must continue to exercise caution in engaging in confidential sales and offers with outside partners
By Joshua M. Brandt
Just because your issued patent was examined by the USPTO does not mean that it is free from challenge. Your competitors may, of course, scrutinize your patent and use IPR to challenge
By John L. Welch
The Board dismissed this opposition to registration of DENTISTRY DONE DIFFERENTLY for "dentist services" because Opposer Timber Dental failed to prove priority.
By John L. Welch
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed this declaratory judgment action because the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear the lawsuit.