<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
An interesting take, since Section 10 says that the assignment of
registrations has to be in writing. It's true of unregistered
marks, though.<br>
<br>
Pam<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">Pamela S. Chestek<br>
Chestek Legal<br>
300 Fayetteville Street<br>
Unit 2492<br>
Raleigh, NC 27602<br>
+1 919-800-8033<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.chesteklegal.com">www.chesteklegal.com</a><br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/14/2023 7:38 PM, Orvis wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:77cdfc93-6ba2-48ac-9b6e-bce533158fb0@gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width,
initial-scale=1.0">
<div style="font-family: sans-serif;"> <span dir="ltr"
style="margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;">Thank you so much. Your
comment aligns with my initial reaction. I did however read an
old decision that hand waved over assignment issues, noting
that an assignment does not need to be in writing.</span> <br>
</div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr" style="font-family: sans-serif">
<p>Nov 14, 2023 10:05:20 AM Pamela Chestek via E-trademarks
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com"><e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com></a>:</p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin:0;border-left:3px solid #ccc;
padding-left:10px"> I don't think so. I have studied nunc pro
tunc and I find it confusing (it is the <a
href="https://propertyintangible.com/2016/12/more-on-what-nunc-pro-tunc-means/"
moz-do-not-send="true">most visited page of my blog</a>, so
I'm not the only one). But my rule of thumb is that a nunc pro
tunc is effective between parties but not effective against
third parties. Suppose I have a trip-and-fall on some
property. The property owner doesn't want the liability, so
transfers the property to their judgment-proof child,
effective before your accident. But the property owner doesn't
get to avoid the lawsuit that way. <br>
<br>
In the same way, the legal reality is that the document was
signed by a non-owner. An agreement between two parties about
the effective date of the transfer doesn't change that reality
at the time of signing (and the unintentionally false
statements made in it). <br>
<br>
But I could be wrong. <br>
<br>
Pam <br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature"> Pamela S. Chestek <br>
Chestek Legal <br>
300 Fayetteville Street <br>
Unit 2492 <br>
Raleigh, NC 27602 <br>
+1 919-800-8033 <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:pamela@chesteklegal.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">pamela@chesteklegal.com</a> <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.chesteklegal.com" moz-do-not-send="true">www.chesteklegal.com</a>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"> On 11/13/2023 10:09 PM, Orvis PC
via E-trademarks wrote: <br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAJ106YxHP_Z_kO6FDzVAQ4GGtNVj8o9xFB=UxUksF2JxDunwbg@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr"> Can a nunc pro tunc assignment fix a failed
attempt to assign?
<div> <br>
</div>
<div> As you all know, a section 8 declaration of use must
be filed by an owner. What if party A thought they were
the owner? But, the 'assignment' was not effective to
make party A an owner. Then party A signs a section 8
declaration. The Section 8 period has expired. </div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div> Can a nunc pro tunc (post Section 8 filing) be
effective to meet the requirement that a renewal must be
filed by an owner? </div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div> MPEP 1604.07(a) <a
href="https://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/TMEP/current#/current/TMEP-1600d1e670.html"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/TMEP/current#/current/TMEP-1600d1e670.html</a>
<br>
</div>
<div> <span style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-size:12.8px">The
affidavit or declaration of use or excusable nonuse
must be filed by the owner of the registration.
Filing by the owner is a minimum requirement that must
be met before the expiration of the deadlines set
forth in §8(a) of the Act, </span><b
style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-size:12.8px"><a
href="https://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/TFSR/current#/current/sec-510834c1-3800-4410-8234-81085d283a9a.html"
target="_blank"
style="text-decoration-line:none;color:rgb(0,140,255)"
moz-do-not-send="true">15 U.S.C. §1058(a)</a></b><span
style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-size:12.8px">, (i.e.,
during the sixth year after the date of registration
or publication under §12(c) of the Trademark Act, or
within the year before the end of every ten-year
period after the date of registration), or within the
six-month grace period after expiration of these
deadlines. </span><b
style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-size:12.8px"><a
href="https://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/TFSR/current#/current/r-2f312231-077f-4984-8e2d-4fc05b7df38c.html"
target="_blank"
style="text-decoration-line:none;color:rgb(0,140,255)"
moz-do-not-send="true">37 C.F.R. §§2.160(a)</a></b><span
style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-size:12.8px">, </span><b
style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-size:12.8px"><a
href="https://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/TFSR/current#/current/r-022fab1e-e151-4eb0-b6d2-7d5aa0a8e885.html"
target="_blank"
style="text-decoration-line:none;color:rgb(0,140,255)"
moz-do-not-send="true">2.161(a)(1)</a></b><span
style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-size:12.8px">.</span>
<br>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>