Blog March 23, 2020
Name of Cactus Genus Not Registrable for Products Derived from Different Cactuses
- Person title
In re TriVita, Inc., ___F.3d ___ (Fed. Cir. Apr. 17, 2015) (NEWMAN, Moore, Hughes) (P.T.A.B.) (1 of 5 stars)
Federal Circuit affirms rejection of mark as descriptive.
The applied-for mark was NOPALEA, for dietary supplements containing nopal juice. "Nopalea" is a genus of cacti from which nopal juice is sometimes derived, though TriVita indicated that its product used only juice from other cacti commonly called "nopal cacti." Notwithstanding TriVita's actual ingredients, substantial evidence supported the Board's finding that customers would assume that the NOPALEA mark denotes products containing ingredients from cacti in the Nopalea genus. Second, while the Board did not make specific findings as to the level of sophistication of actual consumers likely to encounter TriVita's goods, there was "abundant" evidence of "nopal" and "nopalea" being used interchangeably. Third, though TriVita urged that by selling only through direct marketing, it could ensure that its mark would only ever be used non-descriptively, it did not submit any actual factual showing to support that contention, and in fact there was evidence of descriptive use by some TriVita distributors. Finally, there was no error in the Board's citation to 1970 law for the proposition that a trademark applicant cannot appropriate, via trademark application, generic names of key ingredients.
The opinions expressed are those of the authors on the date noted above and do not necessarily reflect the views of Fish & Richardson P.C., any other of its lawyers, its clients, or any of its or their respective affiliates. This post is for general information purposes only and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed.
Blog November 4, 2019
Legal Alert: Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. - What Did the Federal Circuit Do?
Blog November 4, 2019
Legal Alert | Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. — What Did the Federal Circuit Do?
Blog August 17, 2018
En Banc Federal Circuit: Patentee's Service of Complaint, Followed by Voluntary Dismissal, Triggers IPR Clock
Blog October 5, 2017
Legal Alert: Federal Circuit Faults PTO's Approach to Claim Amendments During IPR, But Allows PTO to Try to Fix the Problem
Blog May 16, 2016
Software Claims Directed to Specific Improvements in Computer Operations May be "Non-Abstract"
Blog May 2, 2016
Corporate Residence Definition in Patent Cases Unchanged by Congressional Revisions to Venue Statute; Minimum Contacts Under Beverly Hills Fan Reaffirmed
Blog April 11, 2016
Claims Directed to Detection of Gene Variants Patent-Ineligible, Notwithstanding Mental Activity Requirement
Blog July 27, 2015
Judicial Review Available for Decision that a Patent Qualified for CBM Review; § 101 Review Appropriate in CBM Review
Blog July 8, 2015
Software Claim Addressing Concepts Long Known in Other Fields and Lacking Other Inventive Concept Is Not Patent Eligible
Article December 27, 2022
Senior Principal John Dragseth Authors IPWatchdog Article "Top Federal Circuit Decisions of 2022 That No One Told You About"
Blog July 6, 2021
Federal Circuit Finds Digital Camera an Abstract Idea
Blog June 24, 2021
Legal Alert: What to Know about the Supreme Court's Arthrex Decision
Blog June 22, 2021
Legal Alert: Supreme Court Issues Opinion in U.S. v. Arthrex
Article January 4, 2021
Fish Attorneys Author Law360 Article, "Lessons For 2021 From Fed. Circ. Post-Grant Review Cases"
Blog November 13, 2020
Federal Circuit Panel Holds Hatch-Waxman Venue Under the Second Prong of § 1400(b) is Based on Actions Related to ANDA Submission
Q&A November 12, 2020
Q&A with Riqui Bonilla and Nitika Gupta Fiorella for Corporate Counsel Business Journal
Article September 1, 2020
Fish Attorneys Author Biosimilar Development Article, "An Update On 2020 U.S. Biosimilars Regulation & Litigation"
Article July 7, 2020
Fish Attorneys Author Article in Bloomberg Law, "INSIGHT: SCOTUS Decision on Computer Fraud Act Could Impact Trade Secrets"
Blog June 26, 2020