...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>AIPLA quarterly journal >APPLYING THE APPROPRIATE APA STANDARD OF REVIEW TO §1052(A) DISPARAGRMENT FINDINGS OF THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD IN A DISTRICT COURT: THE WASHINGTON REDSKINS AND ITS TRADEMARKS
【24h】

APPLYING THE APPROPRIATE APA STANDARD OF REVIEW TO §1052(A) DISPARAGRMENT FINDINGS OF THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD IN A DISTRICT COURT: THE WASHINGTON REDSKINS AND ITS TRADEMARKS

机译：将适用的APA审查标准适用于地区法院商标审判和上诉委员会的§1052（A）偏差认定：华盛顿红皮书及其商标

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The Washington Redskins are not the only sports team to use Native American imagery or reference in its name: Cleveland Indians (MLB baseball), Chicago Blackhawks (NHL hockey), Kansas City Chiefs (another NFL football team), and Atlanta Braves (MLB baseball), among others, are all users. The outcome of this case will set a precedent for future § 1052(a) claims that will potentially affect these multi-million dollar sports teams. The potential impact of Blackhorse may result in challenges to their own Native American trademarks in the future, and the decision could lead to challenges to non-Native American imagery or names that disparage a substantial composite of the relevant group. For example, the Notre Dame Fighting Irish, with its imagery of a tiny leprechaun figure with arms raised in fisticuffs, is the federally-registered trademarked mascot of the University of Notre Dame. While it is an unlikely target for challenges, it is perhaps an example of how attitudes between specific groups view their stereotyped, cultural depictions. The policy implications of the case are interesting to consider and will likely play an active, or at least a subconscious, role throughout the proceedings as part of the judge's role. When this issue was first before the D.C. District Court in the Harjo appeal, the "substantial evidence" APA standard was selected to review the TTAB's findings. Despite the Supreme Court's ruling in Dickinson that the findings of the TTAB were only reversible if they failed a reasonable mind test, the D.C. District Court discarded the voluminous evidence summarized by the TTAB and reversed on the merits. Due to the ruling on laches, the issue never arose on appeal, but the Blackhorse litigation presents the opportunity for the Eastern District of Virginia to set new precedent on § 1052(a) claims by considering closely the instructions of the Supreme Court in applying the APA standards of review to TTAB findings. The Eastern District of Virginia has ruled on cross-motions for summary judgment in favor of Blackhorse, upholding the TTAB's finding that the marks "may disparage;" Pro-Football will appeal this order to the Fourth Circuit. In their ruling, the Eastern District of Virginia mentioned the APA standards of review and their application in the Harjo appeal, but they declined to select or discuss the appropriate standard to apply in this case, stating only that, "the Court is not restricted to only reviewing the TTAB's findings of fact like the district court in Harjo." This purposeful dodge of the issue of what standard of review TTAB findings of fact in § 1052(a) cases should have may be due to the nature of summary judgment review, but nevertheless, whether on remand of this case from the Fourth Circuit or in some future case, the Eastern District of Virginia will eventually have to decide how to apply the APA § 706 standards to § 1052(a) findings of fact. In conclusion, the TTAB's ultimate finding of disparagement, within the accepted analytical framework of the meaning of the word, should be afforded a more deferential APA standard of review by the Eastern District of Virginia than it was by the D.C. District Court because of the direction of the Supreme Court in Dickinson. The Blackhorse litigation should not be sidetracked by the doctrine of laches defense, which became the sole focus of appeal in the Harjo line of cases to the detriment of making a decision on the merits. While a more deferential standard of review may or may not change the ultimate outcome of the case, the factual findings of the TTAB should not be overruled based on "substantial evidence" unless there truly is no way that a rational, reasonable person could think the findings were accurate. The Eastern District of Virginia is not required to apply-and should not apply- the erroneous logic of the D.C. District Court in its analysis of the facts. The Eastern District of Virginia should choose to apply the APA § 706(2)(E) "substantial evidence" standard of review and its slightly higher judicial scrutiny, and should adhere closely to the Supreme Court-mandated reasonable mind test as to the evidence in Blackhorse. The TTAB is a specialized agency tasked with adjudicating specialty areas such as § 1052(a) claims. The TTAB's findings are subject to review by courts under varying circumstances and should not suffer from inconsistent application of standards of review of their highly specialized fact-findings. The Eastern District of Virginia should set a new § 1052(a) precedent and apply a more deferential standard to findings of fact reached by the TTAB, the body that has developed the expertise for making trademark decisions.
机译：华盛顿红皮队并不是唯一使用美国原住民图像或名称进行参考的运动队：克里夫兰印第安人（MLB棒球），芝加哥黑鹰队（NHL曲棍球），堪萨斯城酋长（另一支NFL橄榄球队）和亚特兰大勇士队（MLB棒球） ）等所有用户。此案的结果将为将来的第1052（a）条要求树立先例，这可能会影响这些价值数百万美元的运动队。 Blackhorse的潜在影响可能会在将来对他们自己的美国原住民商标造成挑战，而这一决定可能会导致对非美国原住民图像或名称的质疑，从而使相关群体的实质成分蒙上阴影。例如，圣母院战斗爱尔兰人（Notre Dame Fighting Irish）的图像是一个妖精的小人物，双臂举起双手，是联邦圣母大学（University of Notre Dame）的联邦注册商标吉祥物。虽然这不太可能成为挑战的目标，但它也许是特定群体之间的态度如何看待其刻板的文化描述的一个例子。该案的政策含义值得考虑，并且可能会在整个诉讼过程中发挥积极的或至少是潜意识的作用，作为法官角色的一部分。在Harjo上诉中首次向华盛顿特区法院提出此问题时，选择了“实质性证据” APA标准来审查TTAB的调查结果。尽管最高法院在迪金森案中裁定TTAB的调查结果只有通过合理的心理测验才可逆转，但特区地方法院却放弃了TTAB总结的大量证据，并按案情推翻了。由于存在裁定，该问题在上诉中从未出现过，但是黑马诉讼为弗吉尼亚州东区法院提供了机会，可以通过仔细考虑最高法院在适用第1052（a）条中的要求，为§1052（a）的要求树立新的先例。 APA对TTAB结果的审查标准。弗吉尼亚东部地区已裁定以交叉动议为由，以有利于黑马（Blackhorse）的方式作出简易判决，维持TTAB的裁定，即商标“可能会贬损”。职业足球队将向第四巡回赛上诉该命令。弗吉尼亚州东区法院在裁决中提到APA审查标准及其在Harjo上诉中的适用，但他们拒绝选择或讨论适用于此案的适当标准，只说：“法院不限于只审查TTAB的事实调查结果，例如Harjo地区法院。”在第1052（a）条案件中应采用何种审查标准TTAB事实调查结果的问题的这种有目的回避可能是由于即决判决审查的性质，但无论是从第四巡回法院还是在第四巡回法院将本案退还在将来的某些情况下，弗吉尼亚州东区最终将不得不决定如何将APA§706标准应用于事实的§1052（a）。总之，在弗吉尼亚州东区，与华盛顿特区地区法院相比，在弗吉尼亚州东区应给予TTAB在该词含义公认的分析框架内最终的贬损裁定，以给予APA更高的审查标准狄金森州最高法院院长。黑马的诉讼不应被by锁辩护理论所绕开，后者成为哈尔乔案中唯一上诉的焦点，不利于就案情做出决定。虽然较高的审查标准可能会或可能不会改变案件的最终结果，但不应基于“大量证据”推翻TTAB的事实调查结果，除非确实没有理性，合理的人可以想到的方式。结果是准确的。弗吉尼亚东区法院在分析事实时不要求也不应采用哥伦比亚特区地方法院的错误逻辑。弗吉尼亚州东区应选择适用APA§706（2）（E）的“实质性证据”审查标准及其稍高的司法审查，并应严格遵守最高法院对证据进行的合理精神测试在黑马。 TTAB是一家专门机构，负责裁定特定领域，例如第1052（a）条中的要求。 TTAB的调查结果将在不同情况下由法院进行审查，并且不应因其高度专业化的事实调查所采用的审查标准不一致而受到影响。弗吉尼亚州东区应该建立新的第1052（a）条先例，并对TTAB所发现的事实调查结果采用更严格的标准，TTAB是开发商标决策专业知识的机构。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号