It pays to read the statute sometimes. If the statute says "the applicant shall file in the Patent and Trademark Office . . . ," having the former applicant file it isn't going to work. The former applicant signed the document before it assigned the mark, but then filed the document after the assignment to the new owner was effective. Under the statute, though, it's the filing that counts, not the timing of the signature.
For the details, see the inestimable TTABlog.
© 2009 Pamela Chestek
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
►
2011
(85)
-
►
December
(10)
- Walter Mercado Still Losing
- Just Another Skirmish or the War?
- Giving An Idea to Your Employer
- Beneficial Owners Don't Have Standing
- Zombie Department Stores Rise (as ugly t-shirts)
- Must All Trademark Owners be Joined?
- Who Owns the Mark Used by a Bunch of People?
- Bratz Copied, But Didn't Infringe
- When You Can Change the Name of the Registrant
- It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time
-
►
June
(13)
- How to Steal a Trademark
- Sibling Rivalry
- Privity as a Sword
- The Coup de GrĂ¢ce for Pooh?
- When Are You a "Distributor"?
- Righthaven's Failed Assignment Agreement
- Important New Patent Ownership Decision!
- Abandoned, No Surprise
- Surprise - Wittmann Can't Call His Product "Wittma...
- There Has to Be Confusion
- Moral Rights versus Economic Rights
- Rejected Trademark License
- Think of the Trademark Too
-
►
December
(10)
-
▼
2009
(103)
-
▼
June
(11)
- Is a Name Necessarily a Mark?
- Smart Money in Movies
- Small Comfort for MGA Entertainment
- Who Owns the Chirp?
- Uh-oh Moment
- "Filed," Not "Executed"
- No Good News for MGA Entertainment
- Who Was Opportunity Knocking For?
- Will the Real MG Please Stand Up
- What Exactly is "Intellectual Property"?
- Who Owns "Black Sabbath"?
-
▼
June
(11)
0 comments:
Post a Comment