Federal Circuit Decides Sua Sponte To Consider En Banc Whether The Bar On Registration Of Disparaging Trademarks Violates The First Amendment

Apr 30, 2015

Reading Time : 1 min

In 2010 and 2011, Mr. Tam sought to register the trademark “THE SLANTS” for performances of his Asian-American dance rock band, The Slants. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a), the examining attorney refused to register Mr. Tam’s mark because it was disparaging to people of Asian descent. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) affirmed and Mr. Tam appealed to the Federal Circuit, arguing that the term “slants” has many meanings and was not disparaging. Mr. Tam also argued that the statute is unconstitutional under, inter alia, the First Amendment, because it conditions a benefit (trademark registration) on relinquishment of speech. The Federal Circuit applied its two-part test from In re Geller, 751 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2014), and found substantial evidence, based largely on Mr. Tam’s own submissions, that the term “slants” in this case likely referred to people of Asian descent, and the mark is disparaging to a substantial composite of people of Asian descent. The court rejected Mr. Tam’s First Amendment challenge based on the court’s precedent stemming from In re McGinley, 660 F.2d 481 (CCPA 1981). Bound by its precedent, the panel affirmed the TTAB’s refusal to register Mr. Tam’s mark. Judge Moore, the author of the panel opinion, also authored “additional views,” further analyzing the First Amendment issue and questioning the continuing propriety of McGinley.

One week after the panel opinion, the full court ordered the case to be heard en banc. The court requested that the parties file new briefs addressing a single question: whether the bar on registration of disparaging marks in 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a) violates the First Amendment. The Federal Circuit will entertain amicus briefs, and will likely hear oral argument later this year or early next year.

In re Tam, No. 2014-1203 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 27, 2015) (per curiam Order).

Share This Insight

Categories

Previous Entries

IP Newsflash

June 5, 2026

The Supreme Court unanimously held that for a complaint of induced infringement, a patent owner must allege that the accused infringer took affirmative, not passive, steps to encourage direct infringement. Thus, where a generic drug has a skinny label, to induce infringement of the carved-out patented use of the drug, the generic company must have taken steps that were designed to cause others to perform the patented use, not just steps that could cause such conduct.

...

Read More

IP Newsflash

May 07, 2026

The Northern District of Illinois granted a summary judgment motion of no invalidity based on indefiniteness because the qualitative terms like “sufficiently slow” and “desired period of time” were definite when viewed in light of the surrounding claim language and specification.

...

Read More

IP Newsflash

April 9, 2026

In the April 1, 2026 edition of the Official Gazette, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office announced a new procedural framework that permits patent owners to submit a limited, early response to a request for ex parte reexamination.

...

Read More

IP Newsflash

March 12, 2026

The Northern District of Illinois recently dismissed a complaint without prejudice for failing to plausibly allege patent infringement. The court found that the allegations of direct infringement were insufficiently pled where the images of the accused product included in the complaint did not appear to show a particular necessary element of the claims.

...

Read More

© 2026 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.