Updates Regarding COVID-19 Impacts on Trademark Operations at the USPTO

Share

Updated April 1, 2020

The Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued a notice on March 31, 2020, that the due date for any of the following filings that falls between March 27, 2020 and April 30, 2020, may be extended for thirty (30) days, provided that the filing is subsequently made within such extended period and accompanied by a statement that the delay in filing (or payment) is “due to the COVID-19 outbreak.”

  • A response to an Office Action (including the filing of a Notice of Appeal)
  • A Statement of Use or a Request for an Extension of Time to File a Statement of Use
  • A Notice of Opposition or a Request for an Extension of Time to File an Opposition
  • A trademark application claiming the priority of a foreign application (whether filed directly with the USPTO or through the Madrid Protocol)
  • A request to convert a Madrid Protocol application to a national application
  • An Affidavit of Use or a renewal application (whether related to a registration obtained nationally or through the Madrid Protocol)

For the delay in filing to qualify for the extension, the delay must occur because the “practitioner, applicant, registrant or other person associated with the filing or fee was personally affected by the COVID-19 outbreak, including, without limitation, office closures, cash flow interruptions, inaccessibility of files or other materials, travel delays, personal or family illness, or similar circumstances, such that the outbreak materially interfered with timely filing or payment.”

If you believe that you and your trademark matter qualify for an extension of time under the foregoing concession, please contact the trademark professionals of Faegre Drinker at your earliest convenience. In the interim,  we will continue to monitor this situation and post updates to this blog post.

Original Post, Dated March 24, 2020

Continue reading

Introducing TCAMToday – a Faegre Drinker℠ blog on T®ademark, ©opyright, Advertising & Media

Share

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP (Faegre Drinker) launched global operations on February 1, 2020. Faegre Drinker is the combination of Faegre Baker Daniels, an international law firm with deep roots in the Midwest, and Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, a full-service national law firm with storied East Coast origins.

With more than 1,300 attorneys, consultants and professionals in 22 locations across the U.S., U.K. and China, Faegre Drinker is one of the nation’s 50 largest law firms based on size and projected gross revenue.

We are very excited to introduce TCAMToday, Faegre Drinker’s successor to the DB®anding Blog.  Our newly expanded team of over 30 T-CAM professionals will continue to provide fresh commentary on Trademark, Copyright, Advertising and Media topics ranging from anticounterfeiting to sweepstakes and promotions.  Watch this space!

Don’t Miss Notices from the Canadian Intellectual Property Office regarding Madrid Protocol Trademark Applications

Share

Wondering why you haven’t received any updates on the progress of your client’s Madrid Protocol application designating Canada?  After reading that question, are you wondering what on earth a Madrid Protocol application is?

Let’s take a step back.  The Madrid system is a mechanism that facilitates the registration of trademarks in multiple jurisdictions around the world.  One way to file trademark applications in multiple jurisdictions is to engage local counsel in each jurisdiction of interest and work with counsel to file individual applications.  By using the Madrid system, however, a trademark owner can file a single international trademark application with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and designate one or more jurisdictions based on just this one application.

Continue reading

Be on the Lookout for Potentially Misleading Trademark Solicitations

Share

If you own a U.S. trademark registration, chances are you’ve received official-looking solicitations offering to handle trademark services on your behalf in return for a fee. Read these notices carefully – more often than not, they don’t come from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Instead, they’re sent by private companies that have obtained your contact information from the publicly accessible USPTO trademark database. Worse than that, these notices may ask trademark owners to pay thousands of dollars in fees in exchange for services that aren’t even timely or necessary.

Continue reading

Scandalous Marks? Nothing the Proverbial Bar of Soap Can’t Fix

Share

The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Iancu v. Brunetti will likely not be the last word on the subject of scandalous trademarks being granted registration. That certainly suggests there is room for further interpretation in the future, especially if Congress elects to amend the Lanham Act. Further, four Justices voiced some degree of concern about scandalous marks being granted registration.

Read the full alert. 

New US Counsel Rule For Foreign TMs Promises Sea Change

Share

This month’s dramatic announcement by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that all foreign domiciled trademark applicants, registrants and parties to USPTO trademark proceedings will now be required to retain U.S. counsel is expected to result in the most significant practical change to domestic trademark prosecution practice in years.

For casual observers, this new rule — set to be effective on Aug. 3, 2019 — may have arrived as an unexpected, or even shocking, development. After all, with this announcement, literally tens of thousands of active, foreign-domiciled participants in the trademark processes of the USPTO will suddenly now require representation by a U.S. attorney, altering years of common practice.

Moreover, the time from announcement to implementation — only 32 days — is remarkably short for agency action of any kind, let alone a new rule set to transform the role of trademark practitioners in relation to a massive class of new clients.

Read the full article on Law360.

Refresh Your Logo While Keeping Your Old U.S. Trademark Registration

Share

We are tickled pink when we get to work with trademark registrations that issued before we were born. ‎(We won’t say when that was.) It’s nifty to be the steward of a trademark that has stood the test of time and that may endure long after we’ve headed off to the Great Principal Register in the Sky (no Supplemental Register for us, no sirree).

But what if your old, venerable logo is due for some sprucing up? ‎Please don’t immediately assume that a logo refresh means that you will need to start over with a new trademark application and allow your old logo registration to lapse. You may be able to amend your national U.S. trademark registration to cover the most current version of your logo, so long as the new logo isn’t a “material alteration” of the original registered logo. This allows you to preserve your original priority date that is associated with your old registration! (Note: this won’t work for registrations obtained in the USA via the Madrid Protocol. Sorry.)

Continue reading

Mindful Management of Marks and Money (Or, Spring Cleaning: Do You Really Need to Renew That Trademark Registration?)

Share

This post is for those who gain pleasure from tidying up.  It’s springtime here in DC, so let’s roll up our sleeves and declutter!  Your trademark portfolio, that is.  You’ll gain a sense of accomplishment AND you can humble-brag about your magical money-saving skills.

Continue reading

To Claim or Not to Claim … Seniority (Guest Post from EU Firm Cleveland Scott York)

Share

Businesses operating in the European Union may be familiar with the concept of “seniority.”  By claiming seniority, an owner of an EU trademark registration may be able to claim prior rights based on existing national trademark registrations in EU member countries.  To illustrate when a business might claim seniority, take the following example:

Continue reading