Good afternoon, thank you all for attending today's trademarks
Webinar series presentation representation signatures an
ethical issues in trademark prosecution practical
information for attorneys.
A link to today's slides was included in the email you
received with the link to join
today's presentation. This session is being recorded and
will be made available for viewing on the USPS website and
YouTube channel within two to three weeks of the presentation
date today. Our presenters for today's Webinar are Kathleen
Cooney Porter senior TM advisor to the USPTO director.
Robert Lavache senior trademark legal policy
Advisor, and David Mayer, a trademark legal policy
attorney.
If you have any questions during the presentation, simply type
them in the chat window to all panelists. There will be time
for questions. There will be time for answers from the
presenters at the end of the session if we do not get to your
question or if you were watching a recording of this
presentation, please email your question to tmpolicy@uspto.gov.
That email address will be posted on the last slide of the
presentation as well.
Today's presentation will cover the following topics. General
ethical considerations for practitioners recognition as a
representative signature requirements an authority to
sign Rule 1118 signature as
certification. Considerations for proof
abuse audits and addressing this conduct
before the USPTO. And now I will turn it over to
Kathleen. Clean Porter.
So good afternoon or good morning everyone and depending
on where you're watching, the presentation is a pleasure for
for us to be here. So I'll be starting us off with general
ethical considerations before practicing before the USPTO.
So I turn attorneys practicing before the office
are subject to the rules of professional responsibilities
set forth by their individual states of condition.
All practitioners engaged impacts before the office are
subject to disciplinary statistics of the office.
So use PTL rules, expressional conduct.
A practitioner shall provide competent
representation to a client.
A practitioner shall reasonably consult with our
clients about the means by which the client objectives
are to be accomplished. Keep the client recently informed
about the status with the batter and she explaine
matters to the extent reasonably necessary to permit
the client to make informed decisions regarding
representation.
A practitioner shall not practice law in a
jurisdiction in violation of the regulations of the legal
profession. After 610 and or assist another in doing so.
General ethical considerations. What is packed before the office
in trademark matters.
Practice before the office is very broad term that includes.
Any related?
Any law related service that comprehends any matter
connected with the representation to the office or
any of its officers or employees relating to a client,
right privileges, duties or responsibilities under laws or
regulations administered by the Office for the Registration of
the trademark.
So this list may include not
exhaustive. Preparing necessary documents in contemplation of
filing the documents with the
office. Corresponding and communicating with the office.
On behalf of the party, consulting with and giving
advice to clients concerning matters pending or contemplated
to be presented before the
office. Planning, preparing and prosecuting application
for trademark registration and also preparing an amendment
which may require written arguments to establish the
legibility of a trademark.
So see January 37 CSR, Section
1. 11.5
Most USB key employees that trains communicate, but
here are also attorneys and are bound by the rules of
threshold contact as well.
USPC employees may not provide legal advice or
opinions about trademark rights, trademark
infringement claims, or the ability of a trademark
registration.
Yes, speak employees may not discuss an application directly
with a represented applicant unless the attorney is also part
of the conversation.
Yes, pick your employees may not discuss the merits of any
particular application or registration with a third party.
General ethical information.
So additional schema mind.
Will two point 11 E providing false petitions or fraudulent
information in connection with the requirements.
For providing accurate domicile information shall be deemed the
bidding at paper or improper progress in violation of section
11, point 18V of his chapter.
And subject to sanctions and actions provided.
Infections 11.18 feet.
Will 2.922 point 192 trademark applicants registered and
parties to the proceedings before their trademark Comma
Appeal board and their attorneys or agents are required to
conduct their business with the CORM and courtesy.
Documents presented in violations requirement will be
submitted to the director and would return this by the
Directores direct Thor Iti.
So see generally 3074 X 11.5.
I'll hand it back over.
Yeah, yeah.
Can you hear me now? OK, there we go sorry bout that.
So good afternoon everyone. I'm going to talk briefly
about but it takes to be recognized as a
representative before the office.
There are basically three ways that one could be recognized as
a representative in a trademark case. They are set forth in Rule
2.17 and these change slightly in connection with the US
Council Rule update fairly recently, and it provides great
flexibility in how one can appear. The clearest way is to
be appointed in a properly signed power of attorney, which
is usually done with the car form. The change of address and
representation form through TS.
Another way to do it is to sign any document on behalf of an
applicant, registrant or party to a preceding who's not already
represented by another attorney.
I'm the 3rd way, which is kind of. The catchall is to appear by
being identified as the representative in any document
submitted to the office on behalf of an applicant register
other party who's not already represented by a qualified
practitioner, and the third one is very broad. We do read into
that that the attorney has consented to this
representation. We have had a few instances where an attorney
has been appointed without their knowledge, which is very rare
and can be addressed by contacting the Policy office.
There's a little delay on the slides, I apologize.
So what does it mean to have a party who's already represented
representation recognized during the pendency of an
application is continue to. It continues until the attorney is
either revoked or is replaced by a new attorney at a
different firm. But when ownership changes or the mark
registers or the application abandons the office considers
the recognition of the power of attorney to automatically end.
Very often we will have.
Information will stay in the record post registration and we
do that as a courtesy, but the next attorney then to file a
document post registration can technically appear by doing so.
So we we understand also that when somebody submits the
document in connection with the maintenance filing, we
will recognize that attorney to be the attorney of record
until that maintenance filing is either accepted or finally
rejected.
And with that I'm going to pass it on to Bob.
Thanks David and good afternoon everyone, so let's talk a little
bit about how one which sign of submission to the office. We
have two main forms that we accept. One is an electronic
signature and that's the electronic signature that is
provided for in our rules and that is essentially any
combination of letters, numbers, spaces or punctuation marks.
That's the signatory has adopted
as Sigma. Sure place between two forward slash symbols, so
generally if it meets those requirements of the rules, we
accept the signature. But of course we'll get to the
authority to sign in some later slides. The other form of
signature that we accept is the traditional pen and ink
signature, and the way that you would submit that signature to
us is by.
Having whoever signing it sign it along with the declaration
verification or environments that are being.
Assigned scanning those into a JPEG or PDF file and then upload
uploading that as an attachment to the T submission. The other
thing I want to mention here is the sort of mechanism for having
someone else sign electronically a submission when you're not the
one who's going to sign it and you're not with the person who
is signing it, and we have what we call E sign on and it's a
method of completing the document and then providing a
link for the signature to be
entered. Two hours of the signatory is once they review
that document. And then enter their signature. They can then
return it to the party who will be submitting the form. After
they complete it.
So now let's talk about.
What are rules require in terms of the electronic signature and
handwritten signature? In both cases, the signature has to be
personally entered. In the case of an electronic signature or
personally sign, in the case of a pen and ink signature.
Now, if you take a look at Rule 2.193, you'll see that it
includes the language, indicating that you could use
some other form of electronic signature specified by the
director. But presently we don't have any such other forms.
I know that document signing software is very popular now
that currently under our rules for most types of signature are
it's not permitted. Currently we are looking into that.
Very important here when we're talking about ethics and what
are rules require, another person may not sign the name of
an attorney or other authorized signatory, so whoever's.
Designated as a signatory, actually has to personally
enter that signature. That means that a paralegal or
legal assistant or secretary or anyone else could not enter
us an electronic signature on behalf of the person signing.
An important note here, and we'll get more into this sort
of ethical obligations later in the presentation, but under
Rule 11.303, practitioner owes a duty of candor to the office
in May not permit the submission of a false
statement or fact of law, so that of course, would or could
apply to improperly signed documents submitted to the
office.
Moving on signatures have to be a real person, so when you
identify this signatory, it has to be a person. It can't be the
company name, for instance.
And our rules also require that the first and last name in the
title or position of the person who signs must be set forth
below or adjacent to the signature we are. We read that
adjacent wording fairly broadly.
So in many cases, if it's somewhere else in the filing and
it's otherwise properly done, we will accept that.
So here are a couple of examples of signatures that are never
acceptable. The first example here at the top shows that the
signatory signatory name and the signature itself identify a
company name. There's no real person identified, so as I
mentioned, that would not be an acceptable signature. It should
be rejected by the examining attorney and would trigger a
requirement in an office action.
And in the next example, you see there's no signature provided at
all. That also of course would trigger a an office action.
I should also note here, under Rule 1118 a each piece of
correspondence filed by Practician in the office must
bear a signature either personally signed or inserted
by the practitioner. Now we don't traditionally strictly
enforce that, so if a signature is omitted, we don't
necessarily consider that a violation. But if we see a
pattern of behavior that could lead to further inquiry.
With that I will turn it over to David for authority to sign.
Thanks Bob and I I think part of the authority to sign question
might actually answer one of the questions we've received from
from the audience regarding why we require different people to
sign out of attorney at different stages. So let me jump
in by saying that.
When somebody has to sign a document before the office, we
need the proper person to do it. But the proper person will
depend on what type of submission we're talking about.
We generally split these into four different categories, we
have verifications of fact, then the responses, amendments,
requests and petitions, and then power attorney. Then this
catchall, we say, mixed documents and what is meant by
mixed documents is essentially those situations where the
document does multiple things. A lot of our forms through tease.
Allow you to do things like make an amendment, but also
change out the attorney.
So.
Let's start by verifications affect. These are primarily
applications. Allegations of use requests for extensions of to
file, a statement of use, a petition to revive, or any sort
of declaration. So for these were talking about any person
with legal authority to bind the applicant, a qualified attorney
representing the applicant or, and this is very broad. Eight
person with first hand knowledge of the facts and actual or
implied authority to act on behalf of the applicant. And
generally we're not going to question the authority of the
person who signs any sort of verification of facts.
Unless there is some inconsistency in the record.
Which is quite rare.
For responses, amendments and requests and these are governed
by several different rules. This is for any response to office
action. Any requests for expense abandonment. Request to divide
petitions to the director. Requests to make any real change
to the record, so that includes addresses and amendments to the
application. If you're changing out the ID. For instance, if
there is an attorney appointed, an attorney must sign these
types of submissions. If the attorney, if there is no
attorney, it has to be signed.
By somebody with legal authority to bind the applicant or
registrant. Ann for joint applicants or registrants.
Everybody must sign for juristic entities. It's not just that the
person signs, we also have to know that the person has the
authority to represent the juristic entity by virtue of his
or her title or position.
So for juristic entities and this is relevant for later too.
When we're talking about who can bind a juristic entity, for the
TMP has a lot of different examples for all different types
of these entities. Domestic corporations, of course.
Probably the most popular there. We want corporate officer. We
want the President, the Chief Financial Officer, somebody with
a corporate title for limited liability company. We're looking
for somebody who has the title manager, owner, principle, or
member. It's a little bit more broad, and for most other types
of entities. Again, the person who who combined.
Be the company.
I will say also that we will take we examining attorneys
especially are trained to recognize titles like CEO.
They'll say they see VP, they'll understand that that's a senior
vice president. It's unacceptable, though for a
juristic entity to sign as a trademark coordinator or agent
of, or just authorized signatory. The exception being
that if the record shows that this person is already been has
been recognized, if the president of the Corporation
signs the application and then signs later as authorized
signatory will presume that they have not changed positions and
will accept that.
I will note that general counsel and in-house counsel there's
there's a couple of things to keep in mind.
And in-house counsel, or any sort of general counsel, is
qualified to practice before the office as an attorney. However,
in less they also have a corporate equivalent title. They
can't sign as a corporate officer. So what we're saying by
that is that somebody identified as in-house counsel may sign a
response in an amendment if that person is currently recognized
as the attorney of record. But that person may not revoke the
authority of a previously appointed attorney and less they
do so in their capacity.
As somebody who's able to legally bind the applicant, so
if you're trying to as in-house counsel revoke the
authority of outside counsel, you have to sign it as general
counsel and Senior Vice president. If that's the
accurate title. If the general counsel is not an officer,
they would have to have an officer sign that particular
document.
So for a power of attorney, that's a good segue to how do we
change out the attorney so that has to be signed by an
individual applicant, registrant, or party to a
pursuit to the preceding or by somebody with legal authority to
bind the Applicant Register party. So once an attorney is
designated, the name practitioner is allowed to to
sign an associate power of attorney appointing another
qualified practitioner. But we know that revocation of the
primary attorney attorneys power also revokes any associate power
of attorney, so Now's Council could be recognized as the
attorney. They're not recognized as someone with legal authority
to bind the inner registering unless that person is also an
officer. So very often, we would suggest that if an application
is filed by the in-house
counsel. Later on that in-house counsel can appoint a outside
counsel to file responses on their behalf because that would
be essentially an associate power of attorney.
So what about these mixed submissions? So mix the
missions? Are these again, these examples are where the
TS form allows multiple things to happen.
Each portion of the sub mission has to be considered separately
to determine if it's properly signed. So if an attorney is
appointed, the attorney must sign the response in the
voluntary amendments, but the applicant may sign the
declaration that's contained in a response or amendment, but if
it's if the response portion is not properly signed, then that
declaration can't be considered. This is, this isn't really that.
We're planning to provide additional clarification for in
the next TMP update.
And with that we're going to get to the fun part. We're
going to do some interactive stuff, and I'm going to pass
it over to Kathleen again.
Or
if I.
Do this correctly. There we go.
OK, as David said, now for the fun part. First hypothetical is
an individual applicant. How we do it to miss his own
application Pro say?
After receiving a complicated looking office action, he asked
his criminal defense attorneys you gotta help take a close look
and see if she could help.
So that it takes a look and realize that the issues are
fairly straightforward, so she fills out the response without
checking out the box to indicate a new attorneys appearing.
But personally signs at and identifies herself as
applicants. Attorneys for the question is, who is
the attorney record and is it properly signed?
And pretend there is some jeopardy. Final Jeopardy music
going on right now.
I don't think the agency licensed music.
Alright, so we have to pretend.
So we've done the polling.
Looks like we have a 6040 split
there. 90% say or no?
Not quite.
Ready for the answer.
Yeah.
And.
So the answer is yes. Ivana is an attorney admitted to practice
by the highest court of the USA restriction and therefore
authorized to package before the USPTO and trademark matters.
Her signature is sufficient to recognize as the attorney of
record. Under 370 of our section 2.171, two looks like we have
some of the cost is broken off. At the end. I'll read it but but
she will draw a new office action. Attorney Bar information
is required when a new attorney has appeared, she probably could
have avoided this office action if she was a little bit more
familiar with the USB to form.
And I'll pass it on.
Thanks Kathleen. Alright, let's go to number 2 here.
In this example, do we file is designated as attorney of
record in an intent to use application for domestic
juristic entity and its Eastside? By surely you jest
the applicants marketing manager.
After a notice of allowance issues, the office first
receives a change of address or
representation form. Appointing carryover apparently applicants
in-house counsel. As a new attorney of record.
The form is signed again by. Surely you jest still
identifying herself as marketing manager and carryover submits a
statement of use the next day.
So who is the attorney of record an? Is this all properly signed?
I see we had a comment that said some people previewed
our slide so they know the answers and they didn't want
to participate in the polls, but I won't tell anybody if
you decide to do that.
I also wanted to mention we're getting a lot of questions about
signatures and will try to pause after all these high posting to
answer some of them.
Alright, looks like most of you said no.
So what's the answer?
Well, when David or IR consulted about these signature issues, we
take a look at the entire record and we go through each
submission to see who was appointed, who signed, and then
we follow it all the way through to see where we end up. So let's
start. With the IT you application.
Dewey is designated as the attorney there so that right off
the bat means easy attorney of
record. It's fine for surely you jest to sign the application as
marketing Manager, because application as we said is a
declaration signature. So she has first hand knowledge or and
implied or actual authority, which we presume in most cases
she can sign the application so it's good so far.
So let's talk about the change of address or representation
form. Now we know there's already an attorney of record.
Surely you Jeff signs the car form appointing carryover. But
there's already an attorney of record, so that means anyone who
signs that has to have the proper authority on behalf of
the juristic entity to sign in marketing Manager as we said.
Is not going to cut it so cannot appoint carryover.
So do you? File remains the attorney of record, but then we
have a statement of use and carry over submits that in
presumably signs it. That's OK, she can sign the statement
of use because, again, like applications, the signature in
the statement of use is a declaration signature.
So kind of a weird result there, but.
These can be tough.
I think God.
He's going to be very surprised to get the
registration certificate thinking that carryover
should be getting it, but that's the likely outcome
here.
Alright, so let's do a couple more individual applicant
domiciled in the US, submits an application signed by attorney.
I forget who's information is filled into the attorney fields.
Of course I forget living up to his name abandons the
application which only required a new specimen.
A timely petition to revive is submitted with the new specimen
Anna, properly worded declaration, signed by
registration applicants Uncle with a sub mission sink. The
signature by Bill am, often attorney at Law, who appears to
be from a different firm than Mr
Forget. So let's try this one. Who is the attorney of record
and is this properly signed?
I'm not sure if.
All is updating. There we go so.
Close split at most people think
no. No, but in this case actually maybe a surprising yes.
The reason is that when the application abandoned Mr.
Forgets power of attorney automatically ended. So the
properly worded declaration came from registration applicants
Uncle, and as we mentioned before, a declaration of is a
verification of facts which can be signed by anybody with first
hand knowledge. So unless we have evidence to the contrary,
we're going to presume that Mr. Stration can sign the
verification effects. Bilham often was named in a document
submitted to the office.
Submitted by by a person with apparent authority to do so.
So we're going to assume that bill more often is now the
attorney of record.
So maybe a surprise result, but again, that flexibility of the
revised to 2.1 seven B at play.
Right passing it back to Bob.
Alright, and example 4A juristic applicant domiciled in the US
submits an application signed by an attorney general counsel who
does not enter enter her name in the attorney fields.
A response is subsequently filed, making several amendments
signed by Know Little of Sanction Law Group who does
enter his attorney information in the attorney fields.
Who is the attorney of record here and is this all
properly signed?
So maybe the maybe the names here give something
away will see.
And again we will. We will pause to answer some questions that
we're seeing come in.
OK, pretty pretty evenly split. Here we have 69 saying yes 53
saying Now let's see.
Now.
So. An attorney signed it as general counsel.
In that case, we can presume that general Counsel identifies
an attorney so.
Assuming that an attorney is admitted to United States,
she is the primary turn of record because the initial
application was a document signed by an attorney on
behalf of an otherwise unrepresented applicant.
So once we have a recognized attorney, Noah Little cannot
submit the response and less either being appointed by and
less. He's either appointed by someone with legal authority to
bind the applicant or an attorney grants an associate
power of attorney to him.
I'll turn it back over to David.
Alright, we're almost there. This is the last one of these
and then will pause for some questions and don't feel bad
if you're getting some of these wrong, these are the
tough ones we we are.
We're trying these these difficult ones, so we have a
juristic applicant domiciled in the US and submits an
application naming imasu you from her squids and Marsh as the
attorney of record. The application is signed by Just
Incase trademark coordinator. After we get the after the
issuance of an office action we get a car form a change of
address or representation form signed by Willie, Notice Chief
in-house counsel in the form that it's bad.
From I can't believe it's a law firm is named as the new
attorney of record that then later files a response.
So is this one properly signed?
Think the names are big hand here.
More seconds.
And we really do appreciate y'all playing along with this.
OK, so as most of you notice that the names give it away
here, no this is not properly signed, so I'ma Sue you is
still the attorney of record because the applications
properly signed just in case the Toria trademark
coordinator can sign a verification of facts. But
Willie notice can't sign a new car form because he there's no
indication that he's the corporate officer or the
equivalent.
So best response can't be accepted because there's
already recognized attorney from a different firm.
This could have been fixed if really notice has signed as
Chief in-house counsel and corporate Secretary Chief
Legal Officer. Some titles that gave him some sort of
officer level authority.
OK, I'm going to pass it back to Bob. I think we're going to
pause for some questions for some questions here though.
Yes, so going all the week we had quite a few and.
I think someone related to the earlier, much earlier slides.
Let's see this one.
Says as it relates to signatures, we know that under
the rules with requirements are, however, in remedying the
situation was the USP toes position for a registered mark,
since USB TIO will not invalidate the mark, making
additional filings only hurts the clients. Is there an
appetite to change the requirements to loosen them?
Why do we require a power of attorney for existing
applications to be signed by the client but not for new
applications? So in terms of remedying an improper signature
when something's already registered, we you know we
talked to attorneys on the outside, we let them know that
that's a decision that they have to make with their client,
because there is the Section 7 presumption of validity validity
by the office, and we try not
to. Enter anything into the record ourselves that would you
know potentially calling the question the ability of
registration, but to the.
Extent that an attorney in his or her client wants to kind of
clarify the record they are permitted to do that by filing
something post registration. Attempting to sort of cure the
record. However they want to do it, but again, that's the
decision that the client in the attorney have to make, because
once you sort of called into question the signatures that.
Were made prior to registration that could potentially open you
up to some third party attacks on the registration.
In terms of changing the requirements to to loosen them,
we don't have any particular plans to do so right now.
We do want to sort of maybe help clarify some of the rules in the
future because we know that they can be very complicated.
In terms of the question of why we require power attorney for
existing applications to be signed by the applicant but not
for new applications, all in new applications. At that point the
applicant is essentially unrepresented and therefore an
appearance under our rules designation. Even without
signature counts as designating an attorney. However, if there
is already attorney appointed, we need someone who has the
proper legal authority on behalf of the client too.
Revoke the previous attorney in. Appoint a new one, but
of course, as David mentioned, if there's
already an attorney of record in that attorney
wants to appoint associate powers of attorney. They are
welcome to do that.
Was there anything else David that you add to that no?
Yeah.
If I could answer the next one, I think we had two
related questions about about when representation
automatically ends.
So again, representation will automatically end up an
abandonment of an application, change of ownership or
registration of the mark.
So one question was whether that is an immediate effect. And yes,
it's immediate appointment of the application. So if a
different attorney were to file the petition to revive, we could
treat the applicant's being unrepresented at that point. And
again, that's kind of it's out of convenience to make sure that
if the applicant we're having some issue with their attorney
that caused the.
An office action to go unresponded to that it's
convenient and easy for them to appoint a new attorney.
We had a follow up question to another related question was
whether what who gets the registration certificate if if
representation ends that registration. Well, it goes to
the current correspondent of record. We leave the attorney
information in the record as a courtesy because we do recognize
that in many situation.
And that representation is going to continue that the attorney is
the one who is acting on behalf of this now registrant. We do
have a TS form that allows an attorney to tell us my
representation has ended. Becaused the mark has registered
or the ownership is changed. So Take Me Out.
So that can be done, but we leave it to the
attorney to do that.
And I'm trying to see if there's any other related question here.
Yeah, just to add to that with the rule saying that
attorney representation is considered to end on
registration. And why do we retain the attorneys
information that was a choice made.
Along time ago actually after we got feedback from
stakeholders that they would prefer to stay in there once
you're registered so that could continue to receive
correspondence. But it is. It is an issue that is commonly
raised by stakeholders now.
And we certainly are looking into that, and whether there's a
better way to do that.
We have two very in rapid succession. There were two
questions about who may sign a power of attorney form. One
asked us to confirm that a newly appointed attorney may sign the
change of attorney rather than the trademark owner, applicant
and another one asks that they've seen in some cases that
the new designated attorney signs him or herself as the new
attorney. Is that allowed?
So the short answer is no, that is not permitted in an
application in the application stage, the trademark owner, the
applicant, is the only one who can revoke an ongoing power of
attorney. So the new attorney cannot appoint him or herself as
the attorney of Record post registration. If an attorney is
signing a change of correspondence and essentially
saying I'm submitting this on behalf of the registrant.
An the new attorney signs that.
Request to update the correspondence address that will
essentially appoint the new attorney as the Attorney of
Record, because again, post registration. The power of
attorney has automatically ended, so during the pendency of
the application, no, it has to be the trademark owner or
somebody with authority to bind a juristic applicant.
And I don't think we've answered this yet. The question was what
happens if you have a client sign a statement of use
declaration? Is this a violation of 1118? Since currently there
so you form doesn't allow the attorney to sign. It only has
one signature section for the Declaration, so that's right,
there is only one signature.
In the so you form currently and that's the declaration signature
in support of the statement of use. So in that case is that
would not be considered a violation, and it's typically, I
think what practitioners would prefer to happen is to have the
client has more knowledge about how the market is being used.
File that declaration.
And if you read 1118 about having an attorney, either sign
or include a signature, I mean I think that's broad enough to
indicate. In situations like this that you know there's
compliance because they have, you know, affected a signature
by having someone else sign in.
Said anything to add to that David, no, no, that's perfect.
We also have a couple of questions about. I think there
was some confusion about declaration signatures about
whether who can sign the declaration, whether it's just
the applicant or the attorney. For this I'm going to point
everybody to rule 2.193 E and that rule contains all of the
everything we're talking about today about who is allowed to
sign for which type of document. It's broken down by document,
but essentially a verification of facts can be signed by.
Someone with legal authority to bind the owner. Somebody with
first hand, knowledge of the facts, and the implied authority
to sign and or the attorney. So a declaration can be signed by
the broadest group of people. It's just the amendments and
things like that where we require if there is an attorney
for the attorney design.
Think.
We have a few more here.
I think we might want to move on since we've got it said
3:45 now, so let's move on and try to get to the.
The rest later.
Alright, moving on to Rule 1118
in detail. And what we wanted to highlight here is that under
Rule 1118, any party presenting paper, whether they're
practitioner or non practitioner an when we say presenting, we
mean flying, filing, submiting or even advocating.
Our behalf of someone for that
submission. Anyone who does that is making certain certifications
first is 1. You're probably all familiar with, which is the
certification or the environment that all statements made in the
submission. Are true and that any sort of willfully false or
fraudulent statements or representations are subject to
penalties under 18 USC 1001.
But there's also in B2B provision that, to the best of
the parties knowledge, information in belief formed
after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances of the
paper is not being presented for improper purposes, and that is
otherwise supported by evidence. So there's no frivolous.
Claims being made in this sort
of. This sort of mirrors.
Yeah, professional ethics.
Rules like the model code.
So the question that would occur to most after reading that is
what is an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances we know
from case law that reasonable inquiry includes information
known or that can be reasonably incredibly readily obtained that
generally an attorney may rely on information provided by a
properly educated client unless the attorney has reason to
believe that such information is inaccurate or incomplete.
So now I'd like to open up for at least a brief discussion.
What is a reasonable inquiry for attorney signing declarations
supporting specimens? Kathleen.
Well, obviously you need to ask the whoever signing if all goods
and services are in use in Commerce and for services many
practitioners know has had an example for each service.
Are you really asking this information on the right
person? If you're dealing with a foreign associates, has it
for an associate requested the correct information from the
client and if the client doesn't understand English,
have they translated the documents they know what
they're signing.
What would you think is a properly educated client?
In terms of submitting specimens or or another submission.
Do you want to take that?
Quote For you know when I was in private practice, I remember
there was an instance where
where. The client sent us for for maintenance filing a image
that appeared to us to be the same image that was in the
original application from 10 years prior, and think they're
reasonable. Inquiry would mean.
Challenging the client that is saying is this still how you're
using it? Is it to say it appears to be the same image and
in at least one case it turned out that no, they weren't using
it with those goods and the market actually change you as a
stylized mark. It didn't even look like that and it led to the
conversation that maybe we need to file a new application to
cover to cover this new variation of the mark. So I
think looking at the record is really important in these cases.
Reasonable inquiry means. Looking critically at what
your client descending you and making sure that.
That it makes sense, I think.
Common sense is a good show.
Right, so it's fair to say that if you have no real idea
of how much your client knows about the requirements here,
there is some education that you have to do before you can
really accept you know some of their answers right.
Correct?
Right?
OK.
Alright, why don't we move on to the next slide?
And I am collecting more of these questions. By the way,
everybody. So when we get to the end we can do that again.
So when we're talking Bout Rule 1118 there, there's two big
parts of it we talked about. 11:18 a briefly be.
He is what Bob was just talking
about. Rule 1118 C deals with violations of the of
our rules, and.
If if one violates Rule 1118, B sanctions could include things
like striking the paper, referring conduct to weed the
office of enrollment in discipline, precluding parties
from submitting documents, or presenting or contesting issues
affecting the weight given to the paper, or in the most
egregious cases, the office can terminate the proceedings.
And for practitioners, very important is actually 1118 D
just a reminder that anybody is filing anything before the
office is subject to the jurisdiction of the Office and
OE can can bring about disciplinary actions for the
purposes of the USPTO, but can also contact state bars. And
there is reciprocal discipline.
We're passing to Kathleen.
OK, so now we're going to discuss.
Could use audit post registration submissions. So who
should sign a Section 8 or 71 affidavit? The attorney in house
counsel IT person having first hand knowledge of the fact.
So essentially, the declaration attesting that
won the marketing used with all of the goods and service
identified in the Declaration, and two the
specimen shows the mark as currently used in Commerce
on our connection with the goods or services.
If there's, I think there's very many experienced practitioners
listening, and we know that sometimes your client wants to
maintain historical registration, and sometimes they
just can't because they don't have current currently used
goods or services in Commerce will discuss excusable nonuse in
one or two more slides.
So the signatory to a Section 8 or 7 APFA David is certifying
that, to the best of the signatories knowledge,
information and belief formed after an inquiry reasonable
under the circumstances.
The factual contentions has evidentiary support.
Most importantly, the signatory is also subject to penalty of
perjury for knowingly and willfully making six false
statements. A representation to the
office.
As many of you know, use PCs began a post
restoration specimen pilot program in 2012 and
then it was made permanent in 2017.
Under the proof of use audit program we use PT.
Oh, make cancel audit registration with
unsubstantiated use claims or to delete unsupported
goods or services.
Since implementation over 50% of audited registrations
are either cancelled or have goods or services removed.
Obviously, the troubling statistics to date suggests lack
of care, lack of knowledge about what the law requires.
Directions are required to submit proof of use for
additional goods and services
and registration. It registers delete those goods or services.
They are then required to provide proof of used for all
goods or services.
As many of you know, and our proposed rulemaking, there's
zero fee for section Seven Amendment requesting deletion of
goods or services prior to an audit and no additional fees
were deleting goods and services currently with the submission of
a section 871 acid. David, but.
2 dollars 200 class via teach for deleting goods or services
importantly after submission and prior to acceptance of a Section
8. Or 71 at David.
So the attorneys have a responsibility to confirm that
the market is in use for each goods and services listed in the
registration before signing or filing the declaration of use.
So have Russians consulted with sales records to determine if
there are ongoing sales of each list? It's good and service.
Confirm with your client that sales are for goods services
sold in connection with the marks shown in the registration.
And consider if there is non use and it may be excusable.
Those of you who may be new to trademark practice. Some
examples are.
Catastrophes like fires or natural disasters or trade
embargo or severe illness or death of a person that mainly
involved in the business. So there are there are ways to
prove excusable nonuse, but the bar is pretty high.
Most importantly, attorneys or registrants to routinely delete
goods or services after audit may be referred for discipline.
So tips for successful post
registration submission? Again, confirm that specifying show
legitimate use in Commerce.
Make reasonable inquiry into how the resident is using the mark.
Continue to checklist for particularly long education or.
Services that may be difficult to read. For instance, if your
client, a pharmaceutical company or a chemical company that has a
very long list of goods and you might want to have a checklist.
Prepare for a possible audit by suggesting clients keep updated
documentation of used in connection with user services.
Photograph the mark on product web page examples
with the URL and date visible or invoices or
photographs of goods being box for transport.
Passing by.
So going to jump very quickly to addressing misconduct in TMS.
Are we doing well when we're talking bout misconduct
involving attorneys? The first thing we do is to ask, is this
really the attorney where we have evidence that suggested and
attorneys information has been used without that attorney's
knowledge or consent, we immediately investigate. We try
to attempt to contact that attorney and we try to fix that,
especially as quickly as possible. If we can't reach an
attorney or we're just not sure and we're talking about.
Applications we might have an examining attorney actually
request additional bar admission information on a
case by case basis to make sure that we're actually
dealing with the real attorney.
Where an attorney is improperly signing submissions an it's a
pattern of behavior. We will refer attorneys to the Office of
Enrollment in Discipline. As I mentioned before, we does have
the power and authority to suspend practitioners. An can
refer conduct to an attorney State Bar for reciprocal
discipline. The Commissioner for trademarks also issues show
cause orders in appropriate cases is essentially that can
result in suspension from practice in trademark matters
and again under 1118 C.
We can end up striking certain documents or terminate a
proceeding before the office again. In the most egregious
cases, the office will also refer suspected criminal
activity to the Office of the Inspector General and sometimes
in some cases directly to the Department of Justice.
Pastor Bob
to talk about one thanks, David.
Yeah, and I think we just like to close here with a
recommendation to read the exclusion on consent order that.
Issued about three 3 1/2 years ago now for Matthew
Squires. He was an experienced trademark
attorney high volume Filer but pursuant to the consent
agreement he did not admit any violations of the rules
of professional responsibility or the rules
of professional conduct. But he did agree to exclusion
while a disciplinary complaint was pending against
him alleging at least 31 rules of professional.
Responsibility and rules of professional conduct.
So we like to call this sort of the baskin-robbins of ethics
cases. It's got 31 flavors of alleged violations. It's very
informative. It gives you a good idea of things that could
potentially go wrong when submiting things to the office.
With that will close the presentation, but I know we do
have some questions that even though we're at 4:00 o'clock
hour, I think we can try to.
Answer at least some of those.
I know there was a question about the auditing process and
whether it's truly random and how they're selected.
So a registration can be audited if a Section 8 or section 71
decoration is timely filed.
And the registration includes at least one class with four or
more goods or services, or at least two classes with two or
more goods or service.
Yes, so that's how those are selected and then in that case
if they are selected, additional proof of use is required.
So we we received have been collecting some of these I
could ask, ask him anybody. Jump in to answer one question
we got. We had we received is if use only requires an offer
of goods for sale way must actual sales be confirmed?
I can answer this one right away. I think that the person
asking this might be completing the patent standard
with the trademark standard.
Under Section 45 at the Trademark Act used in Commerce
for goods requires that the mark is placed in any manner on the
goods or their containers or displays, or the tags or labels
affixed thereto, or in practical cases, on documents associated
with the goods and the goods are sold or transported in Commerce
and offered for sale is not necessarily use in Commerce.
We received the question is a qualified US attorney required
in the case of the Madrid Protocol designation that does
not present anything requiring an office action?
You wanna feel that one?
Ann
so I was reading some of the other questions, but in
Madrid protocol designation that does not present
anything requiring an office action, is a qualified. You
miss attorney required.
Well, now if it's if it's something that would otherwise
be approved for publication, and that's probably what the
examining attorney is going to do. If there's an office
action, that's when the requirement would be made.
I hope that answers the question, not sure that
was a question or not. Yeah, I think I think it
falls into that exception in the examination guide.
Right for US domiciled clients, if they happen to be outside the
United States when they signed the Declaration, does that
matter? Or do they need to be in the United States with the US IP
address when they sign?
Do I take that David? Well, sure.
So there's no. There's nothing in the rules that requires
that a party be in a specific location for signing the
matter when we're talking about the domicile rule in the
US Council rule for domicile, that's the question of where
the applicant is actually domiciled. Is somebody's on
vacation outside the country, and find the document from
outside the country. That's fine, they can do that.
If there is no attorney of record, is it
possible for an attorney to sign an
file the PEO A?
So. That again, that's 217 E 2.
E2A2 so yes, if the applicant is unrepresented,
then the attorney who signs a peo a esentially is
appearing on behalf of signing a document on behalf
of an otherwise unrepresented applicant. And
yes, that is acceptable.
So let me see we have.
We have a couple of questions about ownership changes. If a
client sells their trademark, can the attorney representing
the client submit the assignment agreement and then
withdraw representation, or does the new owner need to
submit and sign the assignment? Similarly, if
during the pendency of the application there's an
assignment of the application who may sign the change of
power of attorney?
But do you wanna take that? You want me to?
Couple things that are right. Well, we know that abandonment
and ownership changes are triggering events for power of
attorney, so those cause power of attorney to end the
assignment questions a little bit more complicated and bearing
in mind that assignments at the office are sort of a recording
process, there's not a lot of substitute examination that goes
into them, but typically I think what you want to see assignment
is a proper conveyance of the interest to the party, so who's
filing it? Whether it's the old attorney, new attorneys,
not typically something that we would look into and less,
there are some other sort of red flags going on.
We also had a question about.
As a user, attorneys referred to obedient they delete goods
in a statement of use.
I understand why they maybe they are deleted post audit, but what
about during prosecution? Sometimes clients drop items he
truly did intend to use earlier. No? I mean, that's not typically
a problem. That's what we want attorneys to do. They want we
want them to check with their clients before filing suit. Used
to make sure that everything that's listed in the notice of
allowance is in use, and if it's not to delete the ones that are
not. So now that would not trigger an OBD referral.
Alright, let's see. We have, if an attorney left the firm, but
the firm is going to continue to represent the client and in the
application is the car form required? Is the applicant
signature required so generally, if the if the.
Firm is continuing representation. We say normally
if the attorney and the leaves, the firm that at that moment we
will essentially allow the attorney to update and say that
here's my new firm information, or we will presume that somebody
signing from the same firm that the attorney was at earlier is
just updating to name a new attorney within the same firm so
generally. I.
Those are sticky, but generally we will presume that if a new
attorney at the same firm is signing the car form, that all
they're doing is changing around who's listed on top, and that's
acceptable. Will normally take
that. Also, I know you can file in the application of power of
attorney listing 6 people and that gives me attorney would
cause seems to know that.
There are authorized.
It's it's good practice in general to use that field when
you're filing an application or updating correspondence where
there are Additionally appointed attorneys. It's helpful to the
office because it tells us these people are explicitly permitted
to file documents.
What can happen in some cases if you get an examining
attorney who's just not sure they're going to end up
issuing an office action and you know you can head that off
by filling in that information so it's a good point,
Kathleen.
Um?
Is it acceptable for someone to sign on behalf of the juristic
applicant on the basis that they have power of attorney to sign
trademark documents on behalf of the party but are not US
attorneys and do not have first hand knowledge of the facts?
I think that's just a no.
There's not an attorney and doesn't have is not the
applicant and does not have first hand knowledge of the
facts. No, they cannot sign.
Yeah, I think there was a related question about foreign
Council. They sometimes are delegated the authority to sort
of act on behalf of the foreign juristic entities that would we
consider that someone under our rules who has legal authority
to bind in. Generally the answer to that is no, we do get
asked about that from time to time. What we're typically
looking for there is the authority to be set forth in
the organizing documents or bylaws or the equivalent.
So hopefully that answers that question.
We're receiving several questions now about extensions
of time to file the statement of use and who can sign those, and
generally those are. I believe those are verification because
it's a extension of the statement of use. That's anybody
with first hand knowledge, the applicant themselves or an
officer or the attorney is permitted to sign those.
We do have a tricky one here that would like to post
everybody. There's a bigger
hypothetical maybe. Some corporations grant members of
their in-house legal department's power to sign POS
and certain documents, such as declarations on behalf of the
company. They may not even the in-house legal team may not
even be lawyers or if they are made, they may not be
corporate officers.
Granted power by the company, how can that be effectively
communicated to the USPTO?
And I think.
My take on this and we may have differing minds here, but my
take is that I don't think that that matters for our purposes.
We we have to be objective about how about these
signatures? If a person is signing a PEO, a revocation of
another attorney in appointing another, a different person.
For it depends on the entity type, what title we're going to
accept. So just because in-house somebody has made the
determination that this person is authorized, that's not going
to cut it for us.
Yeah, and we do see in in response to questions from
examining attorneys we do see attorneys and napkins admitting
you know contracts or agreements
that say. Basically that the juristic entity has designated
this person to act on their behalf in these circumstances.
But again, we're generally looking for there is is the
authority to have been granted in the organizing documents or
the bylaws of the of the entity. So we typically don't accept
those sort of extensions of the 42 to others.
Similar question is by somebody else a different
situation where all of the in-house counsel are also
granted officer titles, and so when they file they don't.
They don't actually fill in the attorney information and
they don't believe that these are the attorneys of record,
but these people are signing the applications and
responses. How do they avoid office actions requiring bar
information and the like?
So I think here it really depends on how the person is
identified in the application. If the if the person is signing
the application as an officer, then the examining attorney is
not necessarily going to include in that. This is an attorney
that the person is signing as trademark counsel. Then they're
signing with the title. That suggests that this is the
attorney in the attorneys representing this applicant, and
therefore they're going to require that bar information.
Even with mixed titles I.
I believe most examining attorneys would require the
bar information so to avoid that the turn the in-house
counsel should use their corporate corporate title
instead.
We had a question about the notice of proposed rulemaking
and the linked to that. I will say I believe that that proposed
rulemaking we had the proposed rule was previously issued. The
final rule is forthcoming. I don't believe that it's yet
published, so you'll have to keep an eye out for that.
Right? It just cleared on the
yesterday. OK, yeah, so soon.
We can say.
Let's see.
We have some later questions here.
Is it permissible use a care of language for the owner address?
So.
Generally no.
A care of address is not the applicants domicile address as
it's defined in the rules. However, there are circumstances
where where the.
Where that information a post office box or a care of
address might need to stay in the record. The forms do have
a place to indicate domicile, apart from the applicant, the
owner, the owner's correspondence information.
So we recommend in most cases that you provide the domicile
separate from that character post office dress.
In the rare circumstances where placing the address in the
record would be harmful to the applicant or registrant for some
reason, generally those are handled on petition and we
suggest that after you file the petition that you contact the
customer service line to let us know so that if something needs
to be handled immediately, we can handle that for you.
Got another question about the physical location of the person
when they sign.
Does it matter where the client is physically located when
signing? For example, if the client is US domiciled but is
traveling through Europe, should the attorney now sign because
the client is momentarily based outside of the US when signing?
No, we don't, that's not.
It's there's no requirement for the person signing to be.
In the US when they sign.
The only caveat to that to watch out for is that if it's late at
night in the United States and the applicant is in Europe and
signs or in Asia and signs pay attention to the date, you may
draw an office action if it appears that the document was
signed the day after the office received it, and you can run
into filing date problems or deadline problems if you wait
too long. If it's the other
direction. So just be aware of that. Generally a
statement that's that could be cleared up at the
miscellaneous statement. If it's a response to office
action or some other form that has that, you can
indicate that the signatory was was in a different time
zone that caused that issue.
Let's see, we have.
Question about what to do if the law firm goes out of business
and the attorney leaves the practice of law. If the attorney
is leaving the practice of law and there are ongoing
applications, I would imagine that's a situation where the
attorney should be requesting to
withdraw. From any active filed an application or registration
that the attorney is currently the attorney of record in.
Very often that that should require that the attorney is
talking to their clients and is passing over the files. If
a new attorney is taking over the business generally will we
would still need some sort of revocation and appointment of
the attorney signed by the applicant for ongoing
applications.
Sorry there we do have a lot of a lot of questions here we're
sorting through, so apologies.
Will this web and R be made available for viewing later,
yes. We will have a recording posted.
We had a question about Canadian attorneys representing Canadian
applicants, so the question was why are Canadian attorneys
allowed to represent Canadian applicants for US? Trademark
registration at the USPTO?
This is a complicated question with a complicated answer. The
Office of Enrollment in Discipline does have limited
recognition of Canadian practitioners representing
Canadian applicants. However, the US Council rule.
Ascentia Lee changes that dynamic a little bit. A Canadian
applicant or registrant is still required to have US Council
Canadian recognized Canadian practitioners who are registered
with OBD are able to do limited representation. They're able to
do some of the things that we as the initial slides indicated we
consider practice before the office, which includes advising
clients an preparing documents, but the US Attorney is the one
who needs to do the actual
submission. Of these documents.
So a little bit complicated.
So I had a question about
reporting. Fake specimens.
They note that therefore pending application, there's
a TM specimen. Protests email pilot program available where
third parties can report those. Is there a similar
email box for post registration and there is
not?
But we will look into that.
Say we.
Is it question about?
Post registration and with the use period is what is the time
period during which is sales must have been made is the
relevant period anytime during the one year period, during
which the decoration is do. Yeah, that is generally the
answer there.
With the statute requires is for you to say that you have been
made in that statutory period.
So hopefully that generally answers the question.
Let's see, can an applicant sign the renewal even when
represented? If there is only one declaration signature
section as well? Or does the attorney needs assign well?
Generally, when we're at the renewal stage?
With some exception, generally, representation will have likely
ended by as matter of law. So because we're we're usually post
post registration or post the filing of some sort of
maintenance document before another one is do. But there are
circumstances where in attorney may have reappeared in the
record. Generally, for a declaration, even if somebody is
represented, the person signing and verification of facts may
may actually sign.
And again with a lot of these signature questions, I do direct
everybody to rule 2.193. That's 37 CFR 2.193, which does contain
substantive direction over.
Which person in which?
M stands for which document?
Did we answer this one? Is it good practice to have authorized
client representatives directly sign applications as so use in
Section 8 filings via the email signature? Linkin tease.
How do we think about that? I think there's a couple of
things to be considered there.
Yeah, I think that that raises. That's a good ethics question.
No, just because the attorney can sign the document doesn't
mean the attorney should sign the document in every case.
No the attorney. Again, it's signing under 1118 B there
saying that they've made reasonable inquiry that they
they believe the statements are true, that the statements are
made with knowledge, that understanding that they are
subject to penalties of perjury. So if the attorney is not sure
that or doesn't have the opportunity to make inquiry,
maybe the attorney should sign. And that's the situation where
it probably makes more sense to have the client sign.
That captain, what do you think is coming from private practice
also? Right, I agree.
We had just now a question about what happens to
documents submitted by non attorney foreigners who may be
using fake attorney information.
So fake information provided to the office is going to be
subject to sanction under 1118. See, these are
situations that we're we're talking bout fake fake
attorney information that's egregious conduct. I think in
most cases that's going to result in something like a
show cause order and the Commissioner potentially
ordering termination of the proceedings for anybody who
may be involved. That's the type of conduct too that can
end up being referred to Ed, or potentially a.
Referral to criminal investigator.
Let's see, here's an interesting one. Assume I have a suitable
specimen showing use on one product for the class, but now
I'm conducting due diligence for the remaining items in the class
for the Section 8 filing. If I can see the products offered for
sale on the client's website, but the website itself would not
qualify as an acceptable online point of sale display, I cannot
see the market actually fixed the goods in the picture on the
website. Must I ask the client to send pictures that show the
mark of fixed every single one
of those goods? Or their packaging?
Kathleen, what do you? What do you think about?
What would you have done?
In your prior life as the outside practitioner.
Wow.
I think it would it. Well, obviously, one specimen support,
you know, 'cause then in one class is are different so.
And less did something very.
Sophisticated by computer hardware software, chemicals, I
might do that, but if it's like.
Something simple like clothing or.
Paper product I think I would go with what the clients said
David. Yeah, I, I think reasonable inquiry here would be
satisfied if you believe that your client is actually selling
these things, even if you can't get a good specimen yourself
from the website. I think reasonably if you're audited,
you'd you'd have a high likelihood of being able to get
a specimen from the client, so I think you'd be fine.
And I chemical chemical client and we would do declarations
from the president attesting to the fact that they are being
shipped in containers and the marks not on it. And that
usually was sufficient to two.
Explain why there's no actual physical specimen.
We received a question about.
Doing a change of representation after taking over from a
different firm who can sign again, these are situations
where when you're changing
representation. If the representation was on going,
then the applicant or registrant must sign. If the.
If the representation is ended as a matter of law, than the
attorney can sign, but only in those limited circumstances.
To the person who thanked us for the funny names. In the
hypothetical, we appreciate your compliments on that that
fix some thoughtful preparation. All David. He
gets the credit and apply.
Looks like we have time for
maybe a couple more. Yeah, it looks like it. Thanks
for everybody. Apologies for the for the delays here
between we are reading the questions as they come in.
Let's talk about it. In the absence of a reason to think
that a client is lying, shouldn't attorney be able to
rely on representations from the client to sign, provided the
legal standard for submiting SLU
decorations, etc. Are provided to the client.
What do we think about that?
I don't think it's that broad. I think the rule
requires reasonable inquiry.
No.
Unfortunately, clients don't always tell the truth, and
they're not always forthcoming with information, I think.
If the attorney is signing for, certainly want to make sure if I
were signing on behalf of my client, I would want to make
sure that I was reasonably certain that I wasn't committing
something false to the office.
Yeah, and I think as a matter of good practice.
And you know you are Kathleen can chime in, but it's probably
good to document some of these things. You know what? What did
you do in terms of due diligence in terms of reasonable inquiry
before you submit it something
or sign something? I think that's just good practice,
and it's sort of an insurance policy in case anything comes
into question later.
That's great, yes, great
practice. Don't take a lot of time so.
If we have a US lcy, but the actual domicile is outside the
United States, what can they
sign so? The you're talking bout a foreign domiciled company.
Even though it's formed in the United States if its domicile as
defined under a rule is outside the United States, they need a
US attorney. So that means that documents that should be signed
by an attorney need to be signed by that attorney.
A document though, that is that the applicant can sign would be
something like the revocation and appointment of a new
attorney. The applicant is still responsible for signing those.
The applicant can still also sign a declaration or
verification of fact if it's a mixed submission. That's the
situation where you might have the applicant sign the
verification of the Declaration statement, but they have the
attorney assigned the submission against certain forms that
applies to but.
I'm. Yeah, the interplay doesn't change for if the company is
represented by an attorney. Doesn't matter if the company is
inside the United States or outside the United States. The
attorney is the one who should be submitting anything that
that's an amendment or change to the application or registration.
We've had some kovid related questions. I think that might be
a good thing to finish up on.
Just a generally, maybe we can Bob if maybe you could address
are. Covid relief and what the offices has done.
Well, yeah, I think in the in the past we did have some cover
relief in terms of extension of deadlines, so those come into
play in certain circumstances. We've also had some initiatives
including petitions to make special for certain kovid
related goods and services where you could maybe advanced those
two assignment two oven to an examining attorney little bit
more quickly than usually.
What would occur?
But I cannot look to see what the specific questions about
Covid were. So 'cause my questions are not advancing so.
We do have quite a bit of information on the website
if you need.
To have that information.
As I think we've said at the beginning, if there are any
questions that we didn't answer here or that occur to
you later, please feel free to send them to
tmpolicy@uspto.gov.
Upcoming events slide one more. I think it is the email.
There we go.
Right?
Thank you for everyone for attending our presentation
today. You should already have received an email with the
survey. We hope that you will complete the survey to let us
know how we did today and any suggestions for future webinar
topics for those viewing the recorded version of this
presentation, please feel free to email your feedback and
suggestions to tmunderscorewebinar@uspto.gov.
Thank you and have a great rest of your day.