|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|19-46||4th Cir.||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.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jul 05 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 7, 2019)|
|Aug 07 2019||Brief of respondent Booking.com B.V. in opposition filed.|
|Aug 21 2019||Reply of petitioners United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al. filed.|
|Oct 09 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/1/2019.|
|Nov 04 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/8/2019.|
|Nov 08 2019||Petition GRANTED.|
|Dec 09 2019||Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Dec 10 2019||Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners' brief on the merits is extended to and including January 6, 2020. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including February 12, 2020.|
|Jan 06 2020||Joint appendix filed.|
|Jan 06 2020||Brief of petitioners United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al. filed.|
|Jan 13 2020||Brief amici curiae of Trademark Scholars in support of neither party filed.|
|Jan 13 2020||Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association in support of neither party filed.|
|Jan 13 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Electronic Frontier Foundation filed.|
|Jan 31 2020||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, March 23, 2020.|
|Feb 12 2020||Brief of respondent Booking.com B.V. filed.|
|Feb 19 2020||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 4th Circuit.|
|Feb 19 2020||CIRCULATED|
|Feb 19 2020||Brief amici curiae of Trademark and Internet Law Professors filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2020||Brief amici curiae of Salesforce.com, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2020||Brief amici curiae of Survey Scholars and Consultants filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2020||Brief amicus curiae of The International Trademark Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2020||Brief amicus curiae of The Association of Amicus Counsel filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2020||Brief amici curiae of Professor Peter N. Golder, Ph.D., and other Marketing Academics filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Internet Commerce Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Boston Patent Law Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2020||Brief amicus curiae of The Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2020||Brief amicus curiae of New York Intellectual Property Law Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 19 2020||Brief amicus curiae of Coalition of .Com Brand Owners filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 20 2020||The record is located on PACER. Sealed record material from the USCA 4th Circuit electronically received.|
|Mar 13 2020||Reply of petitioners United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 16 2020||ORAL ARGUMENT POSTPONED.|
|Apr 13 2020||Argument to be rescheduled for May 2020.|
|Apr 15 2020||RESCHEDULED FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, May 4, 2020.|
|May 04 2020||Argued. For petitioners: Erica L. Ross, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Lisa S. Blatt, Washington, D. C.|
|Jun 30 2020||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Sotomayor, J., filed a concurring opinion. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion.|
|Aug 03 2020||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
Having covered the Supreme Court for six decades, @lylden has seen a lot of changes at 1 First Street. In the latest piece in our series on the post-COVID court, Lyle examines how the court's pandemic operations could spur permanent reform.
How has COVID-19 changed the Supreme Court? And are any of those changes worth keeping? Today we launch a symposium examining those questions.
First up, a piece from @stevenmazie on how to reform oral arguments after the pandemic.
The court after COVID: A recipe for oral argument reform - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court has not yet announced whether it will return to normal operations when the 2021-22 term begins ...
NEW shadow-docket case: New York landlords ask SCOTUS for an emergency order to prevent the state from continuing to enforce its COVID-related eviction moratorium. They say the moratorium "runs roughshod" over their constitutional rights.
Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A8-1.pdf
New on the shadow docket: Florida seeks an emergency order blocking CDC policies that substantially limit cruise ships from sailing.
Florida asks #SCOTUS to block, pending appeal, CDC restrictions imposed on cruise industry b/c of COVID-19 pandemic: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A5.pdf
NEW: Mississippi formally asks the Supreme Court to overturn its landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade, in latest court filing. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/184703/20210722161332385_19-1392BriefForPetitioners.pdf
Biden’s SCOTUS reform commission met yesterday and discussed several reform ideas including adding justices and adopting a formal code of ethics.
Term limits emerged as a popular idea. But how to implement it — via statute or constitutional amendment?
Term limits emerge as popular proposal at latest meeting of court-reform commission - SCOTUSblog
The Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court reconvened on Tuesday to hear from a new set of experts on vari...