Where Technology, Innovation and

Protection Come Together


  • HOME
  • > Blog Main Page

To read all our blog entries, please visit our blog archive here >> 

  • When applying for a trademark, an applicant may face complications such as an application rejection due to various reasons. A “confusingly similar” rejection is issued when “the trademark examiner believes that there is a likelihood of confusion between your trademark and the mark of another,” whether a registered or pending mark (“BitLaw Guidance”).

    The significance of identifying “confusing similarity” in a trademark is to prevent confusion by the public between marks and their goods and services provided.


  • The expansion of the legal usage of cannabis in states throughout the US emphasizes the relevance of intellectual property protection as with any new and expanding industry. Thus, it is natural that the cannabis industry would seek to obtain protection for their inventions as soon as possible, just like anyone else.


  • 37 CFR 1.183 “suspension of rules” and 37 CFR 2.146 (a) (5) state that “petition may be taken to the director in an extraordinary situation, when justice requires and no other party is injured thereby, to request a suspension or waiver of any requirement of the rules not being a requirement of the Act of 1946.” The USPTO views COVID-19 to be an “extraordinary situation.”


  • With the mutual approval of the Withdrawal Agreement Act 2020, the United Kingdom (“UK”) marked its official leave from the European Union (“EU”) on January 31, 2020. Since then, people have wondered what the UK’s next steps will be and specifically, what will this mean for intellectual property.


  • An inventor may obtain a patent protection for their new product by applying through the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Patents are meant to guarantee an inventor the negative right to exclude others and protect their product or method. Certain cases may inhibit an inventor from receiving a patent such as violating the on-sale bar. The on-sale bar statute 35 U.S.C. § 102 (b) in the Patent Act, a statute that governs patent law in the United States, establishes the limitations an inventor may encounter when attempting to obtain a patent.


  • Three Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property hearings were held in June to discuss the state of patent eligibility and solicit other stakeholder’s feedback. These three hearings featured three panels of five witnesses each, for a total of 45 witnesses. After the final hearing, the bill draft went back for changes.


  • The After Final Consideration Pilot 2.0 (AFCP 2.0) has yet again been extended by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) until September 30, 2020. The main objective of this program is to help promote compact prosecution and bolster collaboration between examiners and stakeholders.