"The latest effort to strip trademark protection from the name of the Washington Redskins is now before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Native Americans, represented by Philip Mause, of counsel at Drinker Biddle & Reath, filed protests Feb. 24 against six pending trademark applications for the Redskins name, some dating as far back as 1992. The trademark applications were filed by Pro Football, inc., the owner of the Redskins, and other entities including the Washington Redskins Cheerleaders in hopes of protecting the trademark for use on clothing and other souvenirs and paraphernalia.

According to Mause, the applications had been "held in abeyance" while the long-running litigation against the Redskins filed by Suzan Harjo and others was underway. As we reported here in November, the Supreme Court denied review of a lower court decision that had rejected the Harjo challenge to existing Redskins trademarks.

The new protest through the trademark office's administrative process makes many of the same arguments that the Redskins name is disparaging and therefore not eligible for trademark protection. "The use of 'redskins' and other so-called Indian names and images in sports are offensive and demeaning to Native American peoples," the protest letter states. In an interview, Mause said the letters were filed at an early stage in the examination process that was reopened after the Harjo litigation ended. As a result, Mause said the issues of laches -- whether the challengers waited too long -- should not come into play."

Get the Story:
New Attack on Redskins Trademark (The Blog of Legal Times 3/5)

Related Stories:
Opinion: Use of Indians as mascots causes damage (12/8)
Column: Redskins owner should know better by now (12/7)
Interview: Amanda Blackhorse, 'Redskins' plaintiff (11/30)
Editorial: Supreme Court fails on 'Redskins' name (11/20)
Column: Readers offer more names for 'Redskins' (11/19)
Opinion: Team should do right thing on 'Redskins' (11/18)
Supreme Court declines Redskins trademark case (11/17)
Redskins case a Supreme Court petition to watch (11/12)
Tribal jurisdiction, Redskins cases up for review (11/10)
Courtland Milloy: A sad symbol of sorry 'Redskins' (10/21)
Column: No reason to keep 'Redskins' around (10/1)
Column: America has outgrown Redskins name (9/28)
Letters: Readers react to Redskins controversy (9/24)
Courtland Milloy: It's time to release 'Redskins' (9/23)
The Independent: On the warpath over Redskins (9/21)
Column: 'Redskins' is the equivalent to N-word (9/18)
Column: Activists await last word on 'Redskins' (9/18)
Column: Not all 'Indian' mascots are offensive (9/18)
Turtle Talk: Redskins has Supreme Court appeal (9/16)
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 (5/18)