In re Magnesita Refractories Company, No. 2016-2345 (Nov. 27, 2017) (non-precedential) Trademark App. Nos. 77/873,477 & 85/834,316

Key point(s):

• When a mark sought to be registered is determined to be generic by the Examiner, evidence of acquired distinctiveness beyond continuous use and sales data is likely to be required.
• The doctrine of foreign equivalents is used to ascertain the genericness or descriptiveness of a foreign-word mark from a common language by translating the mark into English.

AIP Acquisition LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., No. 2016-2371 (Nov. 30, 2017) (non-precedential) Patent No. 7,269,247

Key point(s):

• If the Board’s reliance on extrinsic evidence in construing a clam term is supported by substantial evidence, the Board’s finding is unlikely to be reversed.

Microsoft Corp. v. Parallel Networks Licensing, LLC, Nos. 2016-2515, -2517, -2518, -2519, -2642, -2644, -2645, -2646 (Dec. 1, 2017) (non-precedential) US. Pat. Nos. 5,894,554 & 6,415,335

Key point(s):

• The Board must provide adequate reasoning to support adverse rulings and must consider all arguments presented by petitioners.