Every trademark assignment must include the transfer of the goodwill associated with the mark's use in a specific business. Section 10 of the Trademark Act (Lanham Act) mandates that any trademark application or registration must be assigned in writing along with the business's goodwill represented by the trademark.
When a trademark application is filed under Section 1(b) of the Trademark Act, different rules apply to assigning applications based on whether the Applicant has already used the mark in commerce with the goods or services specified in the application. If there has been use, an Allegation of Use or a Statement of Use must be submitted to the USPTO. Once the use statement is filed, the assignment rules become the same as those that apply to use applications or trademark registrations. On the other hand, if the Applicant has not yet used the mark in commerce, an assignment can only be made to a successor of the business (or a portion of the business). In other words, in these circumstances, a trademark assignment must transfer the mark, the goodwill of the business, and part or all of the ongoing and existing business associated with the mark. Refer to 15 U.S.C. § 1060(a)(1).
A trademark applicant must strictly comply with the statutory provisions if an assignment is made before filing an Allegation of Use or a Statement of Use. This means that the assignment document should explicitly state that the trademark application is being assigned as part of the entire business or as a portion of the business to which the mark pertains, along with the goodwill symbolized by the trademark. Additionally, the language used must be concise, and there must be an ongoing or existing business related to the mark that is being transferred. Strict adherence to the statutory provisions is crucial to protect the validity of the assignment against potential challenges.
If a challenge is successful based on transferring an intent-to-use application before filing a use statement, the trademark application will be rendered void. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) or a court will assess whether the assignment is part of a larger transaction between the assignor and the assignee. A notable case is Central Garden & Pet Co. v. Doskocil Manufacturing Co., 108 U.S.P.Q.2d 1134 (TTAB 2013), where the Board canceled a trademark registration because the intent-to-use applicant assigned the mark before filing a Statement of Use without transferring a portion of the ongoing business to which the mark pertained. Although the mark was in use at the time of the assignment in this case, the Board emphasized that use in commerce was not a factor since the Statement of Use had not been filed before the assignment.
However, in the case of Philip Restifo v. Power Beverages, LLC substitued for Paul Kidd (aka Ishmael Hassan), Opposition No. 91181671 (September 21, 2011) [not precedential], the Board issued a different decision. Despite the absence of specific language in the assignment document indicating the transfer of the ongoing business to which the intent-to-use application pertained, evidence demonstrated otherwise. The record showed that additional assets beyond the mark and the goodwill associated with the trademark's use were assigned. These cases underscore the special rules applicable to intent-to-use applications. Practitioners should carefully consider the facts surrounding a trademark assignment occurring before the filing of a Statement of Use and employ concise language in the assignment document.
If you need legal advice regarding your trademark rights, assistance with trademark prosecution, or representation in a domain name dispute, contact Wilson Whitaker Rynell. Our team of trademark lawyers has extensive experience in all aspects of trademark and copyright law, including the filing of trademark applications and representing clients in defense or prosecution before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
Getting in touch is easy. Use the form below and request a free consultation today.
Recognized in the legal industry as dedicated board-certified lawyers and Rising Stars.
Your project will be handled by legal experts every time. You will have the most experienced attorneys working for you.
Let's talk about your legal issue
Wilson Legal Group P.C.
d/b/a Wilson Whitaker Rynell
(972) 248-8080 (Dallas) MAIN OFFICE
(713) 830-2207 (Houston) Appointment Only
(512) 691-4100 (Austin) Appointment Only
For more information on how we can assist in your intellectual property, commercial litigation, divorce, or other personal needs, let us know how we can help you:
WILSON WHITAKER RYNELL
Thank You for Contacting Us!
Your information has been sent, and we will contact you shorlty...issues.
WILSON WHITAKER RYNELL
Oops, there was an error sending your message.
Please try again later.
Disclaimer:
This form does not establish an attorney-client relationship, and should only be used to contact the firm about scheduling a call or meeting. No confidential or sensitive information should be sent using this form.
We represent clients nationwide, including Dallas, Austin, Houston, and other Texas areas such as Fort Worth, Arlington, Carrollton, Plano, Allen, Lewisville, Flower Mound, Irving, Denton, McKinney, North Richland Hills, and all cities within Dallas County, Tarrant County, Collin County, and Denton County.
Wilson Whitaker Rynell
16610 Dallas Parkway, Suite 1000
Dallas, Texas 75248
972-248-8080 (MAIN)
972-248-8088 (FAX)
info@wrrlegal.com (E-MAIL)