Trademark Law Summaries
Page 1 of 1 of Trademark Law Summaries » New Proposed Legislation
To amend Title 35, United States Code, and the Trademark Act of 1946
H.R.6362, S.3295,
08/05/2008
On August 5, 2008, t he U.S. Congress sent to President George Bush for signing a bill that transfers the power to appoint administrative trademark judges and administrative patent judges from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") to the Secretary of Commerce.
Previously, under the Intellectual Property… More...
To amend Title 35, United States Code, and the Trademark Act of 1946
H.R.6362, S.3295,
07/22/2008
The U.S. Senate has unanimously passed on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 a bill that transfers the power to appoint administrative trademark judges and administrative patent judges from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") to the Secretary of Commerce.
The proposed legislation however did not totally clip the… More...
H.R. 1778,
03/29/2007
This proposed legislation was introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Wiiliam D. Delahunt (Ma.), and co-sponsored by 17 others on March 29, 2007. As the title of the bill suggests, the bill the Director of the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is given the discretion to accept… More...
S.1806,
07/17/2007
This bill was introduced in the Senate by Sen. Patrick J. Leahy on July 17, 2007, and co-sponsored by three others, and is a legislation that seeks “(t)o restore to the judiciary the power to decide all trademark and trade name cases arising under the laws and treaties of the… More...
Page 1 of 1 of Trademark Law Summaries » New Proposed Legislation
Trademark Law Commentaries
Following are Trademark Law Commentaries elaborating on the significance of the most important of the Trademark Law Summaries.
Page 2 of 2 of Trademark Law Commentaries < 1 2
Pebble Beach Company, A California General Partnership v. Michael Caddy, an individual
Posted: 05/30/2007
Commentary: Plaintiff Pebble Beach Company owned and operated a golf course resort in California. Defendant operated a small-business in southern England and ran a passive website located at www.pebblebeach-uk.com. Plaintiff sued for trademark dilution in the district court in California. The defendant moved for dismissal based on a lack of personal jurisdiction. The district granted the dismissal and denied Plaintiff's request to conduct jurisdictional discovery. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, holding that mere ownership of a passive website that does not purposefully direct its activity at the forum cannot be subjected to personal jurisdiction there.
More...
Related summary: Pebble Beach Company v. Caddy
Page 2 of 2 of Trademark Law Commentaries < 1 2
