Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/16pdf/15-1293_1o13.pdf
Page Number: 8

4 

MATAL v. TAM 

Opinion of the Court 

B 
Without  federal  registration,  a  valid  trademark  may
still be used in commerce.  See 3 McCarthy §19:8.  And an 
unregistered trademark can be enforced against would-be
infringers  in  several  ways.  Most  important,  even  if  a 
trademark  is  not  federally  registered,  it  may  still  be  en-
forceable under §43(a) of the Lanham Act, which creates a
federal  cause  of  action  for  trademark  infringement.    See 
Two Pesos, supra, at 768 (“Section 43(a) prohibits a broader
range  of  practices  than  does  §32,  which  applies  to  regis-
tered marks, but it is common ground that §43(a) protects
qualifying  unregistered  trademarks”  (internal  quotation
marks  and  citation  omitted)).1   Unregistered  trademarks
may  also  be  entitled  to  protection  under  other  federal 
statutes,  such  as  the  Anticybersquatting  Consumer  Pro-
tection  Act,  15  U. S. C.  §1125(d).    See  5  McCarthy
§25A:49,  at  25A–198  (“[T]here  is  no  requirement  [in  the
Anticybersquatting Act] that the protected ‘mark’ be regis-
tered:  unregistered  common  law  marks  are  protected  by
the Act”).  And an unregistered trademark can be enforced 
under  state  common  law,  or  if it  has  been  registered  in  a 
State,  under  that  State’s  registration  system.    See  3  id., 
§19:3,  at  19–23  (explaining  that  “[t]he  federal  system  of
registration and protection does not preempt parallel state 

—————— 

1 In the opinion below, the Federal Circuit opined that although “Sec-
tion  43(a)  allows  for  a  federal  suit  to  protect  an  unregistered  trade-
mark,”  “it  is  not  at  all  clear”  that  respondent  could  bring  suit  under 
§43(a) because “there is no authority extending §43(a) to marks denied
under  §2(a)’s  disparagement  provision.”    In  re  Tam,  808  F. 3d  1321, 
1344–1345, n.11 (en banc), as corrected (Feb. 11, 2016).  When drawing 
this  conclusion,  the  Federal  Circuit  relied  in  part  on  our  statement  in 
Two  Pesos  that  “the  general  principles  qualifying  a  mark  for  registra-
tion  under  §2  of  the  Lanham  Act  are  for  the  most  part  applicable  in
determining  whether  an  unregistered  mark  is  entitled  to  protection 
under  §43(a).”    505  U. S.,  at  768.    We  need  not  decide  today  whether
respondent  could  bring  suit  under  §43(a)  if  his  application  for  federal
registration had been lawfully denied under the disparagement clause.