Subject: Comments to Madrid Protocol Proposed Rules

Proposed Rule 2.66 (a) permits the applicant to file a petition to revive an
application abandoned because applicant did not timely respond to an Office
action. It requires the petition to be filed within two months of the
mailing date of the notice of abandonment.

Proposed Rule 2.146 (c) (i) provides that, if the petitioner was not
diligent in checking status every six months, the Director may deny a
petition to reactivate an application or registration that was abandoned,
cancelled or expired because papers were lost or mishandled. It
specifically mentions in part (3) that the Office has issued an action or
notice that the petitioner has not received.

How do these two Proposed Rules fit together? Suppose that the notice of
abandonment was lost or mishandled--and at any rate not received by the
petitioner-- and that although the petitioner was diligent by checking every
six months, the two months after the mailing date had passed?

I suggest that Proposed Rule 2.66 (a) be expressly made subject to Proposed
Rule 2.146 (c) (i).

William M. Borchard
Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman, P.C.
1133 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036

Tel: (212) 790-9290
Fax: (212) 575-0671
Email: wmb@cll.com
Web: www.cll.com