Three Motions to Amend Marks: How Would You Rule?
Here are three recent cases involving motions to amend an opposed mark, each motion having the consent of the non-moving party. Of course, even with consent, such an amendment will be accepted only if it does not materially alter the mark. How would you rule?
MasterCard International Incorporated v. CambridgeCommerce, Inc., Opposition No. 91155999 (April 4, 2012) [Applicant's motion to amend its mark from that shown above to that shown below].
Free Spirit Publishing Inc. v. Robert L. Styles, Opposition No. 91204026 (April 4, 2012) [Motion to amend Applicant's mark from A BULLY FREE WORLD to A WORLD WITHOUT BULLYING].
Diageo North America, Inc. v. Spirits Of The USA LLC, Opposition No. 91204026 (March 27, 2012) [Motion to amend Applicant's mark from PELICAN BAY RUM to PELICAN RUM].
TTABlog hint: They all came out the same way.
Text Copyright John L. Welch 2012.