TTAB decisions and opinions
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board is the USPTO tribunal that decides oppositions, cancellations, concurrent-use cases and ex parte appeals — whether a mark should register or stay registered. Rightsy indexes 18,719 of its decisions, 1,265 of them precedential (the ones the Board cites as binding), each with its outcome, its grounds and, where the Board published it, the full opinion. Every decision links to the proceeding it decided and the marks at issue.
Precedential, newest first
- Olsman, MacKenzie, Peacock & Wallace, P.C. v. Emily Grace Thomas — TTAB opposition decision, sustained · precedential · Ownership, Affirmative defenses · No. 91272167
- Ralph's Famous Italian Ices Franchise Corp. — TTAB ex parte appeal decision, mixed · precedential · Sections 1, (2), (3), and 45, Configuration/Trade Dress, Section 2(f), Requirements · No. 90302728
- Wemby Corporation — TTAB ex parte appeal decision, refusal affirmed · precedential · Section 2(a), Section 2(c) - Name/Portrait · No. 97752244
- TextNow Inc. — TTAB ex parte appeal decision, refusal affirmed · precedential · Likelihood of Confusion, Requirements · No. 98231457
- Everwise Credit Union — TTAB ex parte appeal decision, refusal affirmed · precedential · Use in Commerce (e.g., nonuse, unlawful use) · No. 88483393
- Misty Everson and Christine Maynard — TTAB ex parte appeal decision, refusal affirmed · precedential · Section 2(e)(5) - Functionality · No. 97104306
- August Storck KG v. Florend Indústria e Comércio de Chocolates LTDA — TTAB opposition decision, dismissed · precedential · Likelihood of Confusion · No. 91277224
- CandyVerse, LLC v. Zeeth Ltd. — TTAB opposition decision, dismissed · precedential · Section 2(d) - Likelihood of Confusion, Requirements · No. 91289595
- CandyVerse, LLC v. Zeeth Ltd. — TTAB opposition decision, dismissed · precedential · Likelihood of Confusion, Requirements · No. 91289595
- Jimenez Jason — TTAB ex parte appeal decision, refusal reversed · precedential · Likelihood of Confusion · No. 97551823
- Jimenez Jason — TTAB ex parte appeal decision, refusal reversed · precedential · Likelihood of Confusion · No. 97551823
- Ye Mystic Krewe of Gasparilla — TTAB ex parte appeal decision, refusal affirmed · precedential · Likelihood of Confusion · No. 90522364
- Ye Mystic Krewe of Gasparilla — TTAB ex parte appeal decision, refusal affirmed · precedential · Likelihood of Confusion · No. 90522364
- El Roblar Investment Property LLC v. Bianca Roe — TTAB opposition decision, sustained · precedential · Section 2(a), Section 1(b) - Bona Fide Intent · No. 91272200
- SawStop, LLC v. Felder KG — TTAB opposition decision, mixed · precedential · Likelihood of Confusion, Sections 1, (2), (3), and 45, Section 1(b) - Bona Fide Intent · No. 91255905
- Princeton Equity Group LLC — TTAB ex parte appeal decision, refusal affirmed · precedential · Geographic terms · No. 97397212
- Republic Technologies (NA), LLC v. Joker Smoker Shop, Inc. dba Joker Smoker — TTAB opposition decision, denied · precedential · Abandonment/Nonuse, Affirmative defenses · No. 91286550
- Tequila Cuadra S. de RL de CV v. Manufacturera de Botas Cuadra, S.A. de C.V. — TTAB opposition decision, sustained · precedential · Section 1(b) - Bona Fide Intent · No. 91282327
- Faram Holding and Furniture, Inc. v. Faram 1957 S.p.A. — TTAB cancellation decision, mixed · precedential · No. 92084197
- Plumrose Holding Ltd. v. USA Ham LLC — TTAB opposition decision, sustained · precedential · Misrepresentation of Source, Affirmative defenses · No. 91272970
- Audemars Piguet Holding SA — TTAB ex parte appeal decision, refusal affirmed · precedential · Section 2(e)(5) - Functionality, Product Design, Configuration/Trade Dress, Requirements · No. 90045780
- Audemars Piguet Holding SA — TTAB ex parte appeal decision, refusal affirmed · precedential · Section 2(e)(5) - Functionality, Product Design, Configuration/Trade Dress, Requirements · No. 90045814
- Hangzhou Mengku Technology Co., Ltd and Fuzhou Mengku Technology Co., Ltd v. Shanghai Zhenglang Technology Co., Ltd — TTAB opposition decision, sustained · precedential · Section 2(e)(1) Descriptive/Generic/Disclaimers · No. 91272143
- Nursecon, LLC — TTAB ex parte appeal decision, refusal affirmed · precedential · Section 2(e)(1) Descriptive/Generic/Disclaimers · No. 88052194
- The Heil Co. v. Tripleye GmbH — TTAB opposition decision, dismissed · precedential · Likelihood of Confusion · No. 91277359
- Empresa Cubana del Tabaco d.b.a. Cubatabaco v. Kretek International, Inc. — TTAB cancellation decision, mixed · precedential · No. 92082877
- DowntownDC BID v. Roquois Y Clarke — TTAB opposition decision, sustained · precedential · Likelihood of Confusion, Affirmative defenses · No. 91275100
- 1661, Inc. v. TF Intellectual Property Pty Ltd — TTAB opposition decision, denied · precedential · No. 91279938
- Monster Energy Company v. Herman Jones — TTAB opposition decision, mixed · precedential · Abandonment/Nonuse, Affirmative defenses · No. 91284247
- Alfred Sarmento v. Maria Manuela Pinho DE Carvalho — TTAB opposition decision, denied · precedential · No. 91281917
By year
- TTAB decisions, 2026 — 401 decisions, 7 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2025 — 696 decisions, 15 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2024 — 650 decisions, 33 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2023 — 687 decisions, 52 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2022 — 646 decisions, 54 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2021 — 674 decisions, 53 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2020 — 784 decisions, 55 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2019 — 635 decisions, 39 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2018 — 596 decisions, 47 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2017 — 677 decisions, 46 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2016 — 685 decisions, 41 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2015 — 637 decisions, 41 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2014 — 653 decisions, 47 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2013 — 740 decisions, 49 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2012 — 643 decisions, 47 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2011 — 534 decisions, 65 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2010 — 507 decisions, 58 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2009 — 722 decisions, 75 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2008 — 927 decisions, 68 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2007 — 679 decisions, 78 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2006 — 577 decisions, 65 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2005 — 503 decisions, 23 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2004 — 686 decisions, 18 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2003 — 577 decisions, 21 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2002 — 685 decisions, 31 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2001 — 698 decisions, 30 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 2000 — 483 decisions, 17 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 1999 — 507 decisions, 20 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 1998 — 402 decisions, 40 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 1997 — 331 decisions, 22 precedential
- TTAB decisions, 1996 — 97 decisions, 8 precedential
By issue
The grounds the Board decided, across every decision (a decision on several grounds counts under each).
- Likelihood of Confusion — 9,844
- Section 2(e)(1) Descriptive/Generic/Disclaimers — 3,738
- Section 2(f) — 782
- Section 2(a) — 352
- Geographic terms — 350
- Sections 1, (2), (3), and 45 — 309
- Requirements — 301
- Specimen issues — 288
- Section 2(e)(4) - Primarily Merely a Surname — 283
- Abandonment/Nonuse — 257
- Section 2(e)(5) - Functionality — 170
- Affirmative defenses — 168
- Fraud and/or mistake — 117
- Ownership — 112
- Section 43(c) - Dilution — 112
- Section 1(b) - Bona Fide Intent — 107
- Use in Commerce (e.g., nonuse, unlawful use) — 98
- Configuration/Trade Dress — 58
- Product Design — 56
- Section 2(c) - Name/Portrait — 33
- Section 2(d) - Likelihood of Confusion — 33
- Section 2(b) - National Insignia — 15
- Section 2(e)(1)/23/6(a) Descriptive/Generic/Disclaimers — 13
- Other Grounds for Refusal/Claims/Substantive Issues — 11
- Phantom Mark — 11
- Misrepresentation of Source — 7
- Sensory Marks — 5
- Matter Protected by Statute — 3
- Fraud — 2
- Other grounds — 1
- Use in Commerce — 1
Search the decisions
Full-text search across the opinions, with outcome, proceeding-type, ground and precedential filters, is in the decisions search. Weighing two marks? The compare page shows how the Board ruled on marks like yours.