About the Author

Scott Slavick

Scott Slavick

Scott Slavick is a shareholder at Brinks Gilson & Lione, where his practice focuses primarily on trademark prosecution and trademark litigation. Scott maintains all aspects of his large corporate clients’ trademark portfolios, and has extensive experience in international trademark matters, including litigation, licensing and prosecution, determining international filing strategies, negotiating worldwide co-existence agreements and implementing strategies to defend trademarks and prevent infringements.

Article List

  • Fee-shifting or fundamental fairness? You decide.

    The appellate court’s ruling in Shammas could lower the number of appeals of USPTO rulings being filed in district courts, because applicants will have to think twice about being stuck with the USPTO’s fees.

  • New life for Naugles? Del Taco dinged at TTAB

    Absent a reversal of this ruling on appeal, Ziebarth's application will now proceed to publication. But the case raises a couple of interesting questions.

  • One more drink’s one too many for TTAB

    While stating this copyright rule is easy, applying it involves trying to draw lines between various types of products—lines often blurry not only to seasoned practitioners but to courts.

  • Don’t park this truck! Dino-dress ruled distinctive

    The TTAB reversed a USPTO’s examiner’s earlier ruling and approved Frankish Enterprises’ application to register the design of its monster truck—a cab decked out with horns, scales, eyes and other dinosaur-like features—for entertainment services.

  • Stretched to its limit, Panini strikes out at TTAB

    In The Topps Co., Inc. v. Panini Amer., Inc., the TTAB sustained an opposition filed by Topps against sports trading card manufacturer Panini’s application to register the word limited for use in connection with its own cards.

  • Halting a Mother’s progress

    Respondent Mother’s bore the burden of proof for asserting laches as a defense; petitioner Ava Ruha needed to plausibly defend its own delay to a court that had agreed that laches did apply.

  • Laches? We don’t need no shrinking laches! (Part 1)

    Laches can be complicated in trademark law, and many practitioners are confused as to the scope of relief it affords. In Ava Ruha, the ruling relied on examining a petitioner’s claims about the date from which the clock starts ticking.

  • Miss thee, Kate! A TTAB victory for the royals

    It’s no surprise that some businesses want to cash in on the royals' fame. But in seeking to trademark a royal’s name, said the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board recently, “We are not amused.”

  • Walk the Line? No, keep a Safe Distance

    This holding in the Western District of Kentucky could prove truly significant, since it clarifies that alleged violations of voluntary settlement agreements do not give courts a reason to use the safe distance rule.

  • That’s a fact, tack you very much

    According to the Supreme Court, applying a test that relies upon an ordinary consumer’s understanding of the impression that a mark conveys falls comfortably within the ken of a jury.

Advertisement. Closing in 15 seconds.