19
Jun

That’s a Nice S-corp…Shame if Something Were to Happen to it…

Attorney, The Creekmore Law Firm PC

Sometimes poorly-drafted corporate documents will allow the majority owners of an S-Corporation to abuse a minority shareholder.  A savvy business attorney, however, can identify a potential “nuclear option” within those same documents that could threaten turning the tax-friendly S-corporation into a double-taxed C-corporation.

Please visit the latest issue of Valley Business Front May [PDF link] for a case study on this topic.

Related Posts

19
Jun

No In-State Tuition for You!

Attorney, The Creekmore Law Firm PC

If you’re originally from out of state, and you hope to later qualify for in-state tuition rates, then check with a lawyer sooner rather than later.  A silly mistake now might easily eliminate your chances later.

Please visit the latest issue of Valley Business Front April [PDF link] for a case study on this topic.

Related Posts

19
Jun

A Name with Distinction

Attorney, The Creekmore Law Firm PC

Double check before you start building a brand you don’t actually own.  To be protectable, a business name has to be distinctive.  To read a case study on the types of terms considered distinctive, please visit the latest issue of Valley Business Front June [PDF link].

 

Related Posts

8
Feb

Kylie Jenner’s USPTO Rejection Has Nothing to do with Kylie Minogue

Attorney, The Creekmore Law Firm PC

Kylie Minogue: “Used under Creative Commons License via Daniel Krucynski. Some rights reserved.”

Everyone needs to calm down.

At least everyone in the entertainment world.

Various major news outlets have been reporting that “Kylie Minogue successfully blocked Kylie Jenner from trademarking the name ‘Kylie!’”—but Kylie Minogue had nothing to do with it. Yahoo, the Huffington Post, and the Today Show were just several news providers I saw touting the trademark-war-turned-cat-fight, when in reality the Kylie v. Kylie throwdown was settled amicably last month by the parties. Minogue originally filed an opposition against Jenner’s application for the “Kylie” mark, claiming it would dilute her own similar marks. In light of successful settlement negotiations, Minogue withdrew her opposition to Jenner’s application for serial nos. 86584742, 86584756, and 86755582 on January 19, 2017.

So what is actually happening? And why the ruckus?

The news should be focusing on Jenner’s appeal of the USPTO’s July 22, 2016 final refusal of mark serial no. 86810719, which was filed in November of 2015—and has nothing to do with Minogue.

Kylie Jenner: “Used under Creative Commons License via Disney ABC Television Group. Some rights reserved.”

Originally the subject of an Office Action in December of 2015, the USPTO most recently rejected registration of the “Kylie Jenner” for likelihood of confusion with mark Reg. No. 4166624, “Kylee.” Both marks claimed International Class 025, which includes clothing and accessories. The “Kylee” mark, belonging to Mimo Clothing Corporation, asserts first use in April 2011 and covers “Belts; Blouses; Bras; Capris; Cardigans; Coats; Corsets; Coveralls; Denims; Dresses; Footwear; Gauchos; Gloves; Gowns; Hats; Jackets; Jerseys; Jumpers; Leggings; Lingerie; Overalls; Panties; Pants; Ponchos; Scarves; Shirts; Shoes; Shorts; Skirts; Socks; Suits; Sweaters; T-shirts; Tank-tops; Tights; Tops; Uniforms; Vests; [and] Wrist bands.” Registered July of 2012, the “Kylee” mark is up for Sections 8 and 15 filings in 2017.

Jenner filed her application for “Kylie Jenner” in 2015, long after the “Kylee” mark’s registration. Upon review, the USPTO determined that “Kylee” and “Kylie Jenner” were 1) too similar, 2) in related categories, and 3) would create a likelihood of confusion with consumers. The final refusal, preceded by a non-final Office Action, issued last July. Jenner’s team filed an appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) on January 23, 2017 to fight the rejection. A full-fledged TTAB proceeding will follow. Apparently, the appeal got the attention of media outlets across the globe, (as any Kardashian news tends to do) resulting in incorrect blame-placing on Australian-based Minogue from halfway around the world.

As of the writing of this article, Minogue has not issued a statement.

The moral of the story — don’t trust everything you see on the news. Especially if it’s about a Kardashian.

Related Posts

New client inquires call 855.443.9350 or
click here