Legal Definitions - interference

In a general sense, interference refers to an unwanted or unauthorized involvement in another's affairs, or an action that obstructs or hinders a process or right. More specifically, within intellectual property law, it describes formal administrative proceedings conducted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to resolve disputes between parties claiming similar rights to inventions or brand names.

• Example 1 (Contractual Interference):

  Imagine a scenario where Company A has a long-standing contract with a supplier, Company B. A competitor, Company C, learns about this agreement and intentionally spreads false information about Company B's reliability to Company A, hoping to disrupt their relationship. As a result, Company A cancels its contract with Company B.

  How it illustrates the term: This situation demonstrates interference as an act of meddling and obstruction. Company C's actions constitute "tortious interference with a contract," meaning they unlawfully and intentionally disrupted a valid contractual agreement between two other parties.

• Example 2 (Patent Interference):

  Dr. Elena Rodriguez, an independent inventor, develops a groundbreaking new medical device and files a patent application for it. Unbeknownst to her, a large pharmaceutical company's research division has been working on a very similar device and files its own patent application around the same time, claiming they were the first to invent it.

  How it illustrates the term: This scenario would trigger a patent interference proceeding at the USPTO. Since both parties are claiming the same invention, the USPTO would initiate a formal process to determine who was the true "first inventor" and therefore entitled to the patent, resolving the conflicting claims.

• Example 3 (Trademark Interference):

  A new startup, "AquaClean," applies to register its brand name and logo for a line of eco-friendly cleaning products. During the application process, the USPTO discovers that an established company already holds a trademark for "AquaKleen" for a similar range of industrial cleaning solutions.

  How it illustrates the term: This situation could lead to a trademark interference proceeding. The USPTO would evaluate whether the proposed "AquaClean" mark is too similar to the existing "AquaKleen" mark, and if allowing both to register would likely cause confusion among consumers about the origin or association of the products.