Interference, opposition, and proceedings for concurrent use registration or for cancellation; notice; Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
United States Code
Citation analytics
How this statute sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
★Highly CitedTop 7% most-cited · cited by 29 decisions
29
Citing decisions
6+
Courts citing
Citations by decade
1
2
5
1
5
5
10
1960s1970s1980s1990s2000s2010s2020s
Courts citing this statute
Most recently cited by10
- 2025Curtin v. United Trademark Holdings, Inc. Fed. Cir.
- 2025General Cigar Company, Inc. v. Empresa Cubana del Tabaco E.D. Va.
- 2025Moke America LLC v. Moke International Limited 4th Cir.
- 2025Moke America LLC v. Moke USA, LLC 4th Cir.
- 2024Xactware Solutions, Inc. v. Buildxact Software Limited 4th Cir.
- 2023Luma v. Dib Funding Inc, & Sunshine Capital, Inc D. Maryland
- 2023Norris v. Goldner S.D.N.Y.
- 2022McGowen Precision Barrels, LLC v. Proof Research, Inc. D. Mont.
- 2021Piano Factory Group, Inc. v. Schiedmayer Celesta Gmbh Fed. Cir.
- 2019V.V v. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd. v. Meenakshi Overseas, LLC 9th Cir.
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Text
In every case of interference, opposition to registration, application to register as a lawful concurrent user, or application to cancel the registration of a mark, the Director shall give notice to all parties and shall direct a Trademark Trial and Appeal Board to determine and decide the respective rights of registration. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board shall include the Director, Deputy 11 So in original. Probably should be preceded by “the”. Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office 22 So in original. Probably should be followed by a comma. the Commissioner for Patents, the Commissioner for Trademarks, and administrative trademark judges who are appointed by the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Director. The Secretary of Commerce may, in his or her discretion, deem the appointment of an administrative trademark judge who, before August 12, 2008, held office pursuant to an appointment by the Director to take effect on the date on which the Director initially appointed the administrative trademark judge. It shall be a defense to a challenge to the appointment of an administrative trademark judge on the basis of the judge’s having been originally appointed by the Director that the administrative trademark judge so appointed was acting as a de facto officer. (Source: (July 5, 1946, ch. 540, title I, § 17, 60 Stat. 434; Pub. L. 85–609, § 1(a), Aug. 8, 1958, 72 Stat. 540; Pub. L. 93–596, § 1, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1949; Pub. L. 96–455, § 1, Oct. 15, 1980, 94 Stat. 2024; Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4716], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–580; Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title III, § 13203(a)(1), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1902; Pub. L. 110–313, § 1(b), Aug. 12, 2008, 122 Stat. 3014.))