"Or so says this IP firm’s website, which asserts that there is a trademark-related circuit split:
We do not believe that the issues raised in this case are going away. In the first place, there is considerable question as to the correctness of the rulings by the District Court and the D.C. Circuit that laches is applicable to a case such as this. Section 14(3) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1064(3), provides that a petition to cancel a registered mark because, inter alia, it has become generic, was obtained by fraud, or is disparaging, may be brought “at any time”. With the D.C. Circuit’s Harjo opinion, there is now a split among the circuits regarding this issue that could give rise to a cert petition. In addition, following the Circuit Court’s original remand decision, a group of six Native Americans, all of whom only recently reached the age of majority, filed a new cancellation petition with the TTAB. Although this proceeding has been stayed pending the outcome of the Harjo lawsuit, it will be activated in the event that the D.C. Circuit’s decision on laches stands.
It gets more interesting. This is consistent with the Harjo plaintiffs’ lawyer asserts (WaPo article), who suggests that one of the split is a Third Circuit decision authored by then-Judge Alito. Maybe there is a chance for this case to be heard.
Get the Story:
Harjo v. Redskins Case Has Potential for Supreme Court
(Turtle Talk 9/16)
Supreme Court Asked to Weigh Redskins Case
(The Washington Post 9/16)
Petition for Certiorari
D.C. Circuit Decision:Pro-Football
(May 15, 2009)
Related Stories:BLT: Supreme Court asked to take on Redskins
(9/15) Opinion: A shameful
day in America with 'Redskins'
(05/20)Court sides with 'Redskins' in trademark dispute