The document discusses updates regarding trademark practice, including changes to USPTO rules and comments due on proposed amendments. Key cases include a lawsuit involving Electronic Arts and trademark disputes over the descriptive nature of certain product names. It also highlights rulings on trademark applications and the similarity of various marks in relation to flooring products.

1. Prosecution Group Luncheon Trademarks July, 2011

2. Practice Announcements USPTO emailing acceptance of 8 & 15 declarations as of 7/3/11 Proposed PTO Rule: to permit the Office to require more than one specimen for declarations of use after registration. Comments are due by September 12, 2011.

3. Handouts Changes to assignment form – CPS Guidance forms for SOU, declarations of use/incontestability, renewal and specimens .XXX Domain Names - Announcement to clients and offer to submit their trademark to be excluded

4. John Dillinger – a deal you could refuse Dillinger, LLC sues Electronic Arts for references to “Dillinger Tommy Gun” in video games based on The Godfather Indiana’s statute does not apply to personalities that died before Indiana ROP statute was passed in 1994 (predicts IN Sup. Ct. interpretation) Creating rights after death would greatly expand potential liability under the statute Assets created after death would frustrate probate law including tax collection and creditors

5. MUSCLE MAIZE is Descriptive of ?? Dictionary definitions of "muscle" and "maize," third-party registrations with MUSCLE disclaimed, and website evidence convinced TTAB that MUSCLE MAIZE is merely descriptive of "dietary and nutritional supplements" MUSCLE MAIZE "would immediately describe, without conjecture or speculation, a significant characteristic or feature of such goods, namely, that they are dietary or nutritional supplements that contain maize starch intended to promote muscle growth and recovery ." In re Nutraquest, Inc. , Serial No. 77729645 (July 7, 2011) [not precedential].

6. Word Reversal Not Reversible Application for TEKSTONE opposed by Registrant of STONETEC – both by vinyl flooring (identical goods) TTAB: "the transposition of terms is not always sufficient to distinguish the resulting marks." the transposition does not "add anything which would change the commercial impression fostered by these marks." They are similar in sound and appearance, and "engender the same suggestive connotations inasmuch as they both reference stone technology ." StonCor Group, Inc. v. Metroflor Corporation , Opposition No. 91194599 (June 24, 2011) [not precedential].