Since Medinol Ltd. v. Neuro Vasx, Inc., 67 U.S.P.Q.2d 1205 (TTAB 2003), the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) has taken a particularly hard line on misrepresentations in trademark applications. In Medinol, the TTAB construed as fraud any false statement that the applicant “knew or should have known” was false. Recent decisions have somewhat narrowed the application of this doctrine, yet it remains a potential minefield for trademark owners.
Medinol was a cancellation proceeding brought to cancel a registration for the trademark NEUROVASX for “medical devices, namely, neurological stents and catheters” on the grounds of fraud. The underlying application had been filed as an intent-to-use and then matured into a full registration with a filing of a Statement of Use. But that Statement was false: the applicant had in fact never used the mark on stents, but only on catheters.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
