On February 13th, 2012, Jeremy Lin filed an application with the United States Patent and Trademark Office for “Linsanity.” However, he was the third entity to file for this mark. Other applicants have subsequently filed for this trademark as well.
However, experts agree that Jeremy Lin will be successful in opposing the earlier filed applications. A proposed mark cannot be registered if comprises matter that may disparage or falsely suggest a connection with persons, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt or disrepute (15 U.S.C. §1052(a).)
Here is a list of reasons that constitute grounds for refusal to register a trademark:
(1) The applicant is not the owner of the mark
(2) The subject matter for which registration is sought does not function as a mark because, for example, the proposed mark:
(a) is used solely as a trade name
(b) is functional, i.e., consists of a utilitarian design feature of the goods or their packaging
(c) is a nondistinctive configuration of the goods or their packaging
(d) is mere ornamentation
(e) is the generic name for the goods or services
(f) is the title of a single creative work or the name of an author or performing artist
(3) The proposed mark comprises immoral or scandalous matter
(4) The proposed mark is deceptive
(5) The proposed mark comprises matter that may disparage or falsely suggest a connection with persons, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt or disrepute
(6) The proposed mark comprises the flag, coat of arms, or other insignia of the United States or any State, municipality, or foreign nation
(7) The applicant’s use of the mark is or would be unlawful because it is prohibited by statute
(8) The proposed mark comprises a name, portrait, or signature identifying a particular living individual without the individual’s written consent, or the name, portrait, or signature of a deceased president of the United States during his widow’s life, without written consent of the widow
(9) The proposed mark so resembles a previously registered mark as to be likely, when used with the applicant’s goods and/or services, to cause confusion or mistake, or to deceive
(10) The proposed mark is merely descriptive or deceptively misdescriptive of the applicant’s goods and/or services
(11) The proposed mark is primarily geographically descriptive of the applicant’s goods and/or services
(12) The proposed mark is primarily geographically deceptively misdescriptive of the applicant’s goods and/or services
(13) The proposed mark is primarily merely a surname