With the cannabidiol (CBD) industry continuing to boom, I've had numerous inquiries from my CBD-selling clients regarding federal trademark. With the cannabidiol (CBD) industry continuing to boom, I've had numerous inquiries from my CBD-selling clients regarding federal trademark protection for. The USPTO rejected this application as not pertaining to a lawful use in Of course, a trademark application for marijuana or CBD or other.
No. USPTO Says CBD? The Federal for Cannabis Trademarks
Instead, the DEA usually opted to reclassify the subject pharmaceutical narrowly by excluding all forms of the product and active ingredient not specifically covered by the FDA approval order. In the case of Epidiolex, this was no different. However, this may not be the end of the FDA approval order in this case.
While it may appear to be a promising strategy to get into federal court, cozying up to FDA-approved pharmaceuticals could also have its drawbacks for a patent owner. October 21, , and October 21, And therein lies the rub.
By relying on a DEA reclassification order that is dependent on a related FDA approval process, UCANN must maneuver not only the traditional types of prior art but also any prior art arising out of the research and clinical testing of the subject pharmaceutical, which is a source of prior art particularly applicable to contemporary cannabis patents.
So, unless a cannabis patent owner is willing to specifically address the unanswered jurisdictional issues associated with asserting property rights in a product utilizing or comprising an illicit substance—or is willing to engage in the lengthy and costly FDA approval process itself—relying on a FDA approval order, from a strategical standpoint, could be a double-edged sword.
The case of United Cannabis Corp. Pure Hemp Collective Inc. To the extent that the U. District Court for the District of Colorado endeavors to directly resolve any of these questions, this case could provide importance guidance in the field of cannabis-related patent litigation, a space that has been mired in uncertainty. She said when California first allowed medical marijuana legally in , it was difficult to have a trademark application approved.
The classes were predetermined classes and if your goods and services didn't fall under one of those classes, which there was no class for cannabis, your mark is not getting registered. Search Now you can search stock related news and private companies such as Airbnb. No matching results for ''. Try a valid symbol or a specific company name for relevant results. Give feedback on the new search experience. Markets open in 6 hrs 25 mins. ALM Media February 11, Recently Viewed Your list is empty.
What to Read Next.
Trademark registration for cannabis and cannabis-based products
The feds won't let companies trademark names of marijuana or many byproducts of the gap between state and federal marijuana laws. As a result, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will not register trademarks for marijuana retailers Winter said CBD is about as close to marijuana as the trademark. A confusing patent office ruling renders it unlikely that any CBD products are not a complete death knell for cannabis brands hoping to trademark a CBD be rejected as violating the Office's Lawful Use Rule,” Campbell says. for the potential federal legal definition of some extracts, particularly CBD. CBD product applications may no longer be immediately accepted under the federal protection of their brands from the USPTO for CBD and other marijuana The CSA defines marijuana to include “all parts of the plant Office claims that a product comprised primarily of CBD cannot possibly be derived.