Maradona's Heirs Win at the TTAB as Q1 Filings Slip 7.4%

Quarterly TTAB Report | USPTO TTAB data through March 31, 2026

On the last day of the quarter, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board sustained an opposition brought by the heirs of Diego Armando Maradona against Sattvica S.A. — the latest round in a years-long, multi-continent fight over the right to commercialize the late soccer legend's name. The win lands in a quarter when TTAB filings fell to 6,640, down 7.4% from the prior quarter, and when opposition plaintiffs were winning roughly three sustained decisions for every two losses. A weak quarter for volume was a strong one for the people doing the opposing.

The Maradona decision (proceeding 91298639) was one of a wave of oppositions resolved on March 31. Sattvica, a company tied to Maradona's former lawyer, has spent years asserting control over the Maradona brand against his children; courts in Europe and Argentina have repeatedly sided with the family. Now the US register has too.

The register is catching up to the courtroom. The Maradona heirs have spent four years untangling their father's name from his former lawyer's company, and the TTAB just handed them another knot.

— Howard Katzenberg, Founder, GleanMark

Executive Summary

• Filings fell 7.4% in Q1 2026, down 528 proceedings to 6,640 from 7,168 the prior quarter — a decline visible across every major category, not one outlier.
• Extensions of time to oppose remained the largest category at 2,940 filings, ahead of 2,049 oppositions, 924 ex parte appeals, and 716 cancellations.
• Opposition plaintiffs won decisively: 1,107 sustained decision entries against 696 dismissed or denied — a roughly 1.6-to-1 edge. Cancellation petitioners led their own split, 394 granted to 279 denied.
• March 31 was a docket-clearing day. Every notable merits decision we tracked issued that date, including a four-case sweep for Mastercard against Polish fintech Cinkciarz.pl and a sustained Apple opposition.
• Big Tech leaned on extensions, not trials. Amazon's high-profile entries this quarter were all extensions of time — the watch-and-wait posture — while Apple, Google, and Microsoft filed full oppositions.

1. Filing Volume

Proceeding Type	Current Quarter Filings	Prior Quarter Filings	QoQ Change
Extensions of Time to Oppose	2,940	3,339	-399
Oppositions	2,049	2,107	-58
Ex Parte Appeal	924	974	-50
Cancellations	716	742	-26
Miscellaneous	11	6	+5
Total	6,640	7,168	-528 (-7.4%)

The decline was broad, not concentrated. Extensions did most of the work, shedding 399 filings — three-quarters of the entire quarter's drop. Everything else moved a little; miscellaneous matters ticked up from 6 to 11, which changes nothing.

Extensions remain the busiest gateway into TTAB practice, and they are the most telling number in the table. A 12% drop in extension requests is a leading indicator: extensions are where brand owners park a dispute while they monitor, negotiate, or decide whether a full opposition is worth it. Fewer of them now tends to mean fewer oppositions a quarter or two out. We think this most likely reflects a cooling in routine, monitoring-driven filings rather than any retreat by serious litigants — oppositions themselves fell only 2.8%, far less than extensions did.

2. Outcomes by Proceeding Type

Proceeding Type	Proceedings With Any Decision	Decision Entries	Sustained	Granted	Affirmed	Reversed	Dismissed or Denied	Moot	Reconsideration	Other
Oppositions	1,827	1,846	1,107	0	3	0	696	3	4	33
Ex Parte Appeal	796	832	0	0	77	17	210	28	378	122
Cancellations	676	690	0	394	0	0	279	6	0	11
Extensions of Time to Oppose	3	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0
Concurrent Use	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1

The story in this table is who wins. In oppositions, "sustained" is a plaintiff win and "dismissed or denied" is a plaintiff loss — and plaintiffs took 1,107 to 696, about 1.6 to 1. Cancellation petitioners ran a similar margin, 394 granted to 279 denied. The party that initiates is the party that tends to prevail, which is exactly why monitoring-and-opposing remains the dominant enforcement play.

Ex parte appeals run on a different scoreboard: there, applicants are fighting an examiner's refusal, and a "reversed" entry is the applicant's win. Those were scarce — 17 reversals against 77 affirmances and 210 procedural disposals. Appealing a refusal to the Board is, on these numbers, a long shot. The 378 reconsideration entries reflect the procedural churn of the appeal docket, not merits outcomes.

A note on counting, true for every row above: "proceedings with any decision" tallies distinct proceedings; "decision entries" tallies individual records, and one proceeding can throw off several. Read every figure here as decision entries.¹

3. Terminations

Proceeding Type	Total Terminated	Terminated With Decision	Terminated With No Decision
Extensions of Time to Oppose	3,032	0	3,032
Oppositions	1,785	1,749	36
Ex Parte Appeal	875	194	681
Cancellations	619	522	97
Miscellaneous	13	0	13
Concurrent Use	1	1	0

Terminations tell you how cases end, and the split is revealing. Oppositions almost always terminate with a decision — 1,749 of 1,785. Extensions terminate without one, every single time: all 3,032 closed with no merits ruling, because that is the entire point of an extension. It is a holding pattern, not a contest. The lesson for anyone reading a termination count: a no-decision close usually means settlement, withdrawal, or abandonment, not a loss on the merits.

4. High-Profile Proceedings

Brand or Owner	Q1 Entries (in dataset)	Proceeding Numbers	Mix	Status
Apple Inc.	5	91306247, 91306025, 99236108, 97309361, 91305928	Three oppositions; two extensions	Pending, suspended, terminated, not instituted
Amazon Technologies, Inc.	3	99141973, 99382183, 99289894	Three extensions	Not instituted and terminated
Google LLC	3	91306268, 91306108, 99349937	Two oppositions; one extension	Pending, not instituted
Nike, Inc.	1	99212367	One extension	Not instituted
zagros amazon fba LLC	1	91306208	One opposition	Pending
Microsoft Corporation	1	91306174	One opposition	Pending
Louis Vuitton Malletier	1	91305942	One opposition	Suspended
Applebee's Restaurants LLC	1	98352741	One ex parte appeal	Terminated

The high-profile entries clustered in the last three weeks of March, and they split neatly by strategy. Amazon's entries in the dataset are all extensions of time — the company was buying itself room to decide, not yet committing to a fight. Apple, Google, and Microsoft each filed actual oppositions: 91306247, 91306268, and 91306174, respectively, all filed in late March and all pending.

Apple's appearance is no surprise to anyone who watches this register. The company is among the most active and most criticized opposers at the Board, routinely challenging applications that brush against "apple" or a stemmed-fruit logo — a posture detractors call trademark bullying and Apple calls brand protection. Its pending opposition 91306247 fits a long-running pattern rather than signaling anything new.

Louis Vuitton's opposition 91305942 is marked suspended. Suspension is not a result; it usually means the parties are in settlement talks or waiting on a related matter, and the case is simply off the active schedule for now.

One housekeeping note worth flagging for readers who cross-reference: the owner field arrives from the register with inconsistent capitalization and punctuation — "Amazon Technologies, Inc" and "APPLE INC." among them. We've normalized those names here; the underlying records vary.

5. Notable Decisions

Decision Date	Proceeding	Type	Parties	Decision
Mar 31, 2026	90407054	Ex Parte Appeal	Free Roam Brewing, LLC	Appeal dismissed
Mar 31, 2026	91230490	Opposition	Cinkciarz.PL v. MasterCard International Inc.	Sustained
Mar 31, 2026	91252235	Opposition	Cinkciarz.pl v. Mastercard International Inc.	Sustained
Mar 31, 2026	91252894	Opposition	Cinkciarz.pl v. Mastercard International Inc.	Sustained
Mar 31, 2026	91253031	Opposition	Cinkciarz.pl v. Mastercard International Inc.	Sustained
Mar 31, 2026	91270271	Opposition	Alfwear, Inc. v. IBKUL UBHOT Ltd.	Dismissed w/o prejudice
Mar 31, 2026	91274967	Opposition	Alfwear, Inc. v. IBKUL UBHOT Ltd.	Dismissed w/ prejudice
Mar 31, 2026	91288949	Opposition	Brandywine Branch Distillers, LLC v. Union Horse Distilling Co., LLC	Dismissed w/ prejudice
Mar 31, 2026	91289962	Opposition	Chicago Cubs Baseball Club, LLC v. Ultra Enterprises, Inc.	Dismissed w/o prejudice
Mar 31, 2026	91294236	Opposition	Flourish Planet Social Benefit Corp. PBC v. Virtue Labs, LLC	Dismissed w/o prejudice
Mar 31, 2026	91295428	Opposition	Bella + Canvas v. Chabella Gomez, Inc.	Dismissed w/o prejudice
Mar 31, 2026	91296961	Opposition	Apple Inc. v. EnChannel Medical Guangzhou Inc.	Sustained
Mar 31, 2026	91297936	Opposition	Monster Energy Co. v. Shanghai Wanxiangheyi Cosmetics Co., Ltd.	Sustained
Mar 31, 2026	91298406	Opposition	Monster Energy Co. v. Shanghai Wanxiangheyi Cosmetics Co., Ltd.	Sustained
Mar 31, 2026	91298639	Opposition	Maradona heirs v. Sattvica S.A.	Sustained
Mar 31, 2026	91299023	Opposition	Sihn jr. GmbH & Co. KG v. Wisq Inc.	Dismissed w/ prejudice

Every decision we tracked issued on March 31 — a fiscal-quarter-end clearing of the docket that is itself worth noting for anyone modeling TTAB timing.

The cleanest cluster belongs to Mastercard, which swept four sustained oppositions against Polish currency-exchange platform Cinkciarz.pl: 91230490, 91252235, 91252894, and 91253031. The fight is old — the oldest of these was filed in 2016 — and turns on overlapping-circles logos that Mastercard says trade on its own. The parties have battled across the EUIPO and EU courts for years; this is the US chapter. The timing carries a grim subtext: Cinkciarz.pl was declared bankrupt in October 2025, so these wins arrive against a company already in collapse.

The headline win, though, is the Maradona family's. In 91298639, the children and heirs of Diego Maradona sustained their opposition against Sattvica S.A. — the company linked to Maradona's former attorney that has spent years asserting ownership of his name worldwide and even sued his daughters for using it. European and Argentine tribunals have consistently refused to recognize Sattvica's claimed transfer of the marks; the US Board has now added its name to that list.

Two more sustained decisions involved marquee opposers: Apple prevailed against EnChannel Medical Guangzhou (91296961), and Monster Energy swept two against the same Shanghai cosmetics company (91297936, 91298406) — a reminder that the most prolific opposers tend to be the most successful ones. The dismissals on the list ran the usual mix of with- and without-prejudice closures, most of them the quiet endings of settled or abandoned disputes.

Practitioner Takeaways

1. Watch the extension drop, not the headline. Volume fell 7.4%, but the real signal is the 12% slide in extensions of time — the leading edge of the opposition pipeline. Oppositions themselves barely moved. The serious disputes are still coming.

2. Initiating still wins. Opposition plaintiffs took sustained decisions over losses by about 1.6 to 1, and cancellation petitioners led too. If you are deciding whether to oppose, the base rates favor the party that moves.

3. Appealing a refusal is a long shot. Just 17 ex parte reversals against 77 affirmances. Fix the application before the Board sees it.

4. Don't read a termination as a loss. Every terminated extension — all 3,032 — closed with no decision. No-decision endings are settlements and withdrawals, not merits defeats.

5. Big Tech telegraphs strategy through procedure. Amazon's quarter was all extensions; Apple, Google, and Microsoft filed actual oppositions. The procedural choice tells you how committed an opponent is before a single brief is filed.

Data sourced from USPTO TTAB records and public filings. Explore more USPTO data analysis on the GleanMark Insights blog.

Footnotes

1. Figures throughout reflect proceedings and decision entries as recorded in USPTO TTAB data through March 31, 2026, and will change as cases progress. Counts of "decision entries" are not counts of distinct proceedings. This report is informational and does not constitute legal advice. ↩