United States Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com B.V.
Docket No. | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
19-46 | May 4, 2020 | Jun 30, 2020 | 8-1 | Ginsburg | OT 2019 |
Holding: A term styled "generic.com" is a generic name for a class of goods or services"and thus ineligible for federal trademark protection"only if the term has that meaning to consumers.
Judgment: Affirmed, 8-1, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg on June 30, 2020. Justice Sotomayor filed a concurring opinion. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Live blog of opinions (Update: Completed) (Kalvis Golde, June 30, 2020)
- Opinion analysis: Court holds that generic.com marks may be registered trademarks or service marks when consumers do not perceive them as generic (Jessica Litman, June 30, 2020)
- Argument analysis:A very orderly argument (Jessica Litman, May 5, 2020)
- Educational seminar: Debrief of U.S. Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com (Katie Bart, May 5, 2020)
- A "view" from my laptop: Arguments.com (Mark Walsh, May 4, 2020)
- Educational seminar: Preview of U.S. Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com (Kalvis Golde, April 30, 2020)
- Argument preview: Is Booking.com generic for online hotel reservation services? (Jessica Litman, April 28, 2020)
- Court sets cases for May telephone arguments, will make live audio available (Amy Howe, April 13, 2020)
- Justices postpone March argument session (Amy Howe, March 16, 2020)
- Justices issue March argument calendar (Amy Howe, January 31, 2020)
- Justices grant governments trademark petition (Amy Howe, November 8, 2019)
- Relist Watch (John Elwood, November 6, 2019)
- Petitions of the week (Aurora Barnes, August 14, 2019)