Ask A Cannabis Trademark Lawyer: How Do I Apply For A State Trademark?

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on January 9, 2018

 As of January 1st, 2018, the long wait is over: cannabis business owners can apply for California state trademarks. The application form can be obtained here: http://bpd.cdn.sos.ca.gov/ts/forms/tm-100.pdf. Because cannabis is still federally illegal and cannabis products themselves cannot be trademarked, this is a viable avenue for many California cannabis brands that will protect your business marks within the state. You can read our prior post about USPTO Trademarks here.

According to the website for the Office of the California Secretary of State:

“Beginning January 1, 2018, customers may register their cannabis-related Trademark or Service Mark with the California Secretary of State's office so long as:

1.The mark is lawfully in use in commerce within California; and 

2.Matches the classification of goods and services adopted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office.  

If the application submitted to register a Trademark or Service Mark is found deficient, the application will be returned to the registrant for correction.

Note: Not all cannabis-related products can be registered under current law due to the inability to meet federal classifications.”

This means that in order to obtain your state marks, you must be lawfully using the marks in commerce at the time of the application. Therefore, you will need to be licensed in compliance with SB 94,  both at the local and state level, before you’re eligible for trademark approval. Otherwise, if you claim an unlicensed use, you may run into issues with the Secretary of State. Further, once your license is obtained, you must also show that you’re making actual, bona fide use of the trademarks on your products in the stream of commerce. That means that customers are identifying you by your brand when they purchase your goods or services in the marketplace.

CA Cannabis Licensing Explained in 2 Minutes - Video

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on December 31, 2017

As we prepare for January 1 and recreational cannabis in California, many legal questions remain for cannabis businesses. In this video, Los Angeles Cannabis Attorneys Margolin & Lawrence explain the local and state licensing process for cannabis businesses in California. If you are looking for a high level overview of what you will need to do to start a cannabis business, or get your existing cannabis business into compliance, this is the place to start.

A Macro-Overview of Cannabis Microbusiness Laws In California

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on December 13, 2017

Our Los Angeles Cannabis Attorneys are constantly fielding questions about a popular license category called microbusiness. The Type 12 license allows you to engage in multiple cannabis activities on the same premises. For example, you could cultivate up to 10,000 sq. ft. of canopy, and distribute, and deliver under one license for microbusiness. The chance to diversify your business and conduct multiple activities under one license is appealing to many existing and prospective cannabis business owners.

The Bureau of Cannabis Control (BCC), released their final regulations for cannabis microbusiness licensees last week, after revising them post SB-94 (you can read more about the process here). Here’s what they have to say about the restrictions on cannabis microbusinesses:

  • Microbusinesses must engage in at least 3 different commercial cannabis activities
  • Microbusiness applicants have to describe operating procedures as required for each activity
  • If a microbusiness license is revoked or suspended, it affects every activity done using that license
  • Microbusiness license fees range from $5,000 to $120,000 depending on size of operation (up to $5 million)
  • Retail operations & Microbusinesses with retail sales can give out free samples to medicinal marijuana customers, as long as it meets the same conditions as normal retail sales
  • Sales at events are allowed
  • Retailers & Microbusinesses with retail will have to employ security guards

If you’re interested in learning more about cannabis microbusiness or retail, Contact us to speak to a Los Angeles Cannabis attorney. 

 

California Redefines Volatile Manufacturing

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on December 1, 2017

Our Los Angeles cannabis attorneys are often faced with questions about which substances count as "volatile solvents" when it comes to cannabis manufacturing. The state has added clarity in the new regulations released on November 17th, which define the solvents for volatile and nonvolatile manufacturing of cannabis extract. You can read the full set of regulations here: regulations on Manufactured Cannabis Safety.

The distinction between “volatile” and “nonvolatile” is relevant to the process of cannabis manufacturing because there are different license types for each type, and some jurisdictions allow one but not the other. Additionally, the zoning and sensitive-use requirements can be different for the two types of cannabis manufacturing.

Cannabis-infused products like marijuana edibles, tinctures, and oils comprise a large part of the legal cannabis industry’s sales, and are only increasing in popularity. A key ingredient of these products is cannabis extract – the pure, often high-THC-content cannabis distillate that can be combined with other products to create goods ranging from weed brownies to CBD bath soaps. To create this distillate, it’s necessary to use chemical solvents to extract the active ingredients from whole marijuana flowers. However, these solvents are often flammable, pressurized chemicals like butane, which, if used improperly during the extraction process, can be dangerous.

To limit potential dangers, California split the activity of cannabis manufacturing into two different categories, distinguished by whether or not they used “volatile solvents,” and placed differing restrictions on the two categories, with additional precautions required for manufacturing operations that used volatile solvents.  In June 2017’s Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act, a “volatile solvent” was defined as a solvent that “is or produces a flammable gas or vapor that, when present in the air in sufficient quantities, will create explosive or ignitable mixtures.”

Cannabis manufacturers who use non-volatile solvents or no solvents at all (e.g. operations that only packaged or labeled goods, or that created cannabis-infused products using distillate purchased from a third party) are treated as “Level 1 Manufacturers,” while manufacturers who dealt with volatile solvents are “Level 2 Manufacturers.” To qualify for a Level 2 Manufacturer operating license, businesses would have to meet a much more strict set of criteria than the Level 1 Manufacturers would.

Since two of the most popular solvents used in the cannabis extraction process – butane and ethanol – counted as volatile solvents by this standard, and relatively few municipalities in California allow for Level 2 cannabis extraction, many were concerned that these regulations would make it too difficult for new small-scale extraction operations to get their businesses up and running. Additionally, some cannabis manufacturers argued that ethanol, a substance that’s food-safe, safe to handle, and is only ignitable as vapor in extremely high concentrations, shouldn’t be treated as “volatile” for the sake of cannabis manufacturing. By responding to these concerns and downgrading ethanol from “volatile” to “nonvolatile,” the Department of Public Health has taken an important step toward making cannabis extraction more accessible to California marijuana businesses.

Locally, the City of Los Angeles will be issuing cannabis licenses for both volatile and non-volatile cannabis manufacturing. Stay tuned for updates for updates, and contact us at info@margolinlawrence.com to speak with one of our LA Cannabis attorneys about the latest on Measure M.

1

Categories

This blog is not intended as legal advice and should not be taken as such. The possession, use, and/or sale of marijuana is illegal under federal law.