POLICY   
Policy > Comments from the Public > Comments on Proposed Changes to Trademark Certificate of Mailing and Express Mail Rules > Mary A. Harris
Mary A. Harris

From: CopyTMLaw@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 3:46 PM
To: TM Mailing Rules
Subject: Comment to Proposed Rule Change Regarding Section 2.197(a)(2) and 2.198

Dear Office of the Commissioner of Trademarks,

I am writing in opposition to the proposed rule change to amend Sections 2.197(a)(2) and 2.198 to provide that the certificate of mailing and Express Mail procedures would not apply to any documents for which there is a TEAS form.

It is my understanding that most applications are filed using TEAS, but then the percentages drop with respect to subsequent filings during the prosecution of the application. This is, in fact, mirrored within my practice, for the following practical reasons. At the outset of representing a client, a great amount of information concerning the application contents and filing requirements is conveyed to and discussed with the client in person, so that there is immediacy between their receipt of this information and their review and signature of the application. However, as the prosecution of the application continues on, the majority of the information conveyed to the client is in written form, such as explanatory letters detailing the requirements for a Statement of Use submission or the like. It is not practical or cost-effective to have clients come into the office to have each step of the process discussed in-person. So, it is my practice to send this type of explanatory, detailed information to the client in written form, along with the document to be signed. It is especially important, post-Medinol to have this supporting information available to the client in hard-copy format, and in companion to the relevant document, so all may be reviewed together. We then submit the paper filing with the client's original signature. This is also an acknowledgment that information is easier to absorb in hard-copy format rather than trying to discern details on the computer screen.

There should not be a penalty for using this method of submission of documents, especially given that the purpose of doing so is to ensure that our clients receive complete and thorough explanations of what the document entails. The penalty would be that TEAS filings are accepted as of the deadline date, but the paper filings would have to be mailed far in advance to assure timeliness.

Please assist us in our efforts to convey vital information to our clients concerning prosecution and maintenance of their applications and registrations, and do not make the process more cumbersome for practitioners solely for the purpose of creating uniformity in method of submission.

Respectfully submitted,

Mary A. Harris, Esq.
960 Toro Street
San Luis Obispo, California USA 93401

copytmlaw@aol.com
(805) 543-0855 (telephone)
(805) 781-3427 (fax)

CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION

This e-mail may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.

 

KEY: e Biz=online business system fees=fees forms=formshelp=help laws and regs=laws/regulations definition=definition (glossary)
The Inventors Assistance Center is available to help you on patent matters. Send questions about USPTO programs and services to the USPTO Contact Center (UCC). You can suggest USPTO webpages or material you would like featured on this section by E-mail to the webmaster@uspto.gov . While we cannot promise to accommodate all requests, your suggestions will be considered and may lead to other improvements on the website.