PUREXXXCBD trademark

PUREXXXCBD Can’t Be Trademarked

Last week, the TTAB, or Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, refused to register AgrotecHemp Corp.’s “PUREXXXCBD” as a trademark for dietary supplements containing cannabidiol because the product was unlawful. Specifically, AgrotecHemp sought registration for goods identified as: “Plant extracts for pharmaceutical purposes; vitamins; dietary supplements; all of the foregoing containing CBD solely derived from hemp

hemp biomass litigation

Oregon Hemp/CBD: Federal Court Allows Biomass Business Litigation to Proceed

The litigation fallout from the hemp rush continues to wind its way through state and federal courts. Just a few years ago everyone and their brother was hot on hemp. Investment capital flooded into Oregon and other states and the industry was awash in new Hemp/CBD farming, processing, manufacturing, and retail businesses. The sheen has

new york cannabis trademark infringement

Reminder: The Parody Defense to Trademark Infringement is Tricky

Parody is a tricky defense to cannabis trademark infringement, or to any infringement allegation whatsoever. For some background on this, check out our posts here, here and here. Still, people riff off established trademarks all the time, and when pursued, they often raise the parody defense. In the cannabis context, this happened most recently in

cannabis trademark litigation

Cannabis Trademark Litigation: Tread Carefully

Federal cannabis trademark litigation is a difficult proposition. In a recent case filed by Wunderwerks, Inc., a company that sells beverages infused with CBD and THC additives, we see another unfortunate example of this. Federal courts, at least, are still no friend to the cannabis industry. Wunderwerks had sued Dual Beverage Company LLC (“DBC”) in

Trademark Litigation: Happi Hour is Over

Trademark Litigation: Happi Hour is Over

We’ve seen a steady stream of trademark litigation in the cannabis space for quite some time now, and it’s as good a time as any to remind our readers that parody is not a defense to trademark infringement. In its complaint filed Monday, Plaintiffs Big Beverage, Inc. and Happy Hour Drinks Company, Inc. dba Happy

sisley v dea marijuana cannabis

Sisley v. DEA: A Petition for Rehearing Has Been Filed

In follow-up to this post, we are happy to report that Dr. Sisley is still fighting the good fight: on Monday, Petitioners filed a Petition for Panel Rehearing or Rehearing En Banc. Although it’s not uncommon for these to get filed, few and far in between are granted (filing such a petition to rehash the

minnesotahempdeltathccbd

Minnesota Cannabis: Appellate Court Rules that Hemp-Derived Cannabinoids in Liquid (But Not Leafy!) Form are Unlawful

We don’t write about criminal cases often, but a recent decision from the Minnesota Court of Appeals caught my eye because of its potential impact on the people of Minnesota and businesses engaged in processing, manufacturing, possession, or selling of Hemp/CBD in Minnesota. This ruling affects manufacturers, processors, sellers, distributors, and consumers of any liquid

sisley dea cannabis marijuana reschedule

The End of Sisley’s Challenge to the DEA

Well, it’s over (for now) for Suzanne Sisley. As we covered last year, Sisley, et al. v. U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, et al., Case No. 20-71433, was an appellate case filed by a group of scientists and veterans that had sued the DEA in May 2020. They, like so many others, argued that the DEA’s

cannabis marijuana bankruptcy

Cannabis Bankruptcy 101

In a prior post, we discussed some of the emerging trends for cannabis-related companies that seek bankruptcy protection (click here to view the prior post). But, in the first instance, the question is whether a cannabis-related company can file for bankruptcy relief? This post will examine the first decision from Arizona in the case of