The Supreme Court Denies Cert Challenging the Use of Third-Party Registrations and Website Printouts as Evidence of Actual Use

Feb 8, 2016

Reading Time : 1 min

The TTAB sustained New Millennium’s opposition, finding that consumers are likely to confuse the parties’ marks. The TTAB also refused to cancel New Millennium’s mark. Jack Wolfskin appealed. In 2015, the Federal Circuit affirmed the TTAB with respect to the refusal to cancel New Millennium’s mark but reversed the TTAB with respect to New Millennium’s opposition. Specifically, the Federal Circuit disagreed with the TTAB’s finding that the “other marks in use” factor was neutral. Instead, the Federal Circuit concluded that this factor demonstrates that New Millennium’s mark is relatively weak because numerous third-parties have registered and used paw print designs in connection with clothing. Thus, the Federal Circuit held that there is no likelihood of confusion.

New Millennium filed a petition challenging the Federal Circuit’s holdings. First, it contended that third-party registrations do not constitute evidence of actual use under prior case law. Second, it stated that the Federal Circuit improperly relied on third-party website printouts. It claimed that without proper authentication, such printouts lacks probative value and cannot demonstrate actual use. The Supreme Court denied the cert petition without explanation, leaving the Federal Circuit’s holdings intact.

New Millennium Sports, S.L.U., v. Jack Wolfskin Ausrustung Fur Draussen GmbH & Co. KGAA, Case No. 15-660 (U.S. Supreme Court, Jan. 25, 2016). 

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

IP Newsflash

November 17,2025

The district of Delaware recently denied a defendant’s partial motion to dismiss pre-suit willful infringement from the litigation, finding instead that the allegations taken as a whole were sufficient to support pre-suit willfulness at the pleading stage. Specifically, the court found that the allegations as to the defendant’s involvement in a related foreign opposition proceeding and participation in the relevant industry were accompanied by detailed factual support that sufficiently pleaded willful infringement for the pre-suit period.

...

Read More

IP Newsflash

November 14, 2025

The Ninth Circuit recently reversed a district court’s decision to strike a plaintiff’s trade secret claims under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) at the discovery stage. In doing so, the Ninth Circuit made clear that under the DTSA, whether a party defined their trade secret with sufficient particularity is a question of fact that generally does not lend itself to resolution in the absence of at least some discovery. This ruling contrasts with the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (CUTSA), which requires a party to define their trade secrets with reasonable particularity before commencing discovery.

...

Read More

IP Newsflash

November 11, 2025

The Federal Circuit recently vacated a summary judgment ruling of invalidity, holding that the district court erred in applying preclusive effect to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s unpatentability findings regarding other claims in the same patent. In doing so, the Federal Circuit reiterated that issue preclusion does not apply where the prior factual determinations were made under a lower standard of proof.

...

Read More

IP Newsflash

November 3, 2025

The Federal Circuit recently clarified the requirement for work disclosed in a reference to qualify as “by another” under pre-AIA Sections 102(a) and (e), holding that there must be complete inventive identity between the information disclosed in the asserted reference and the inventors named on the relevant patent. 

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.