<html>
<body>
Dear Trademark List,<br><br>
One of my client's applications is suspended pending the resolution of a
preexisting application.<br><br>
Fair enough. HOWEVER:<br><br>
1. When it is examined, the preexisting application almost
certainly will be refused registration. While my client's current
application is junior, it also has a senior registration which gives it
superior rights. It was on that basis my client's application was
suspended.<br><br>
2. I filed a Letter of Protest in the preexisting application,
informing the Trademark Office of my client's senior registration.
The Letter was accepted - causing a notation in the record of the
preexisting application.<br><br>
3. <b>The preexisting application was filed in May 2021 -- yes,
over three years ago -- yet no Examiner has been appointed!</b> The
only notation in the public file since then is the reference to my
recently filed Letter of Protest (the notation is addressed to the
"Examiner:" followed by no name).<br><br>
I wrote to TrademarkAssistanceCenter@uspto.gov about this, and got a long
generic non-sequitur response, explaining how "suspensions"
work. As to the preexisting application it only wrote:
"we can't discuss any particular application or registration with a
third party."<br><br>
So, what, trademark applications can be ignored indefinitely -- and for
unexplained reasons? I did not make any ex-parte statement
about the preexisting application except to observe it has not been
examined, which is an objective fact, and a problem for my
client.<br><br>
The Trademark Examiner for my client's application (who understands the
preexisting application is likely to be refused registration) suggested I
write to TMPolicy@uspto.gov because it can see the non-public aspects of
the preexisting application -- and she cannot.<br><br>
I do not mean to suggest anything nefarious is going on -- beyond system
failure (things get lost). But (if I may be forgiven for
being a little grandiose) the fact there is a world of secret trademark
files -- who's secrecy prevents my client from asserting its rights --
seems like a Due Process violation. Or Administrative Procedure Act
violation. Or something. Halloooo Franz Kafka!<br><br>
Any suggestions? <br><br>
Best,<br>
<br>
- Charles<br><br>
<br><br>
===========================================<br>
Charles B. Kramer, Esq.<br>
~ ATTORNEY ~ <br>
Linkedin:
<a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/charleskramer" eudora="autourl">
www.linkedin.com/in/charleskramer</a> <br>
Tel: +1 917-512-2721<br>
Email: charles.b.kramer@gmail.com <--- for direct
responses <br>
Mail: 200 E. 10th Street, No. 816, New York, NY
10003<br>
Blog:
<a href="https://www.provideocoalition.com/CharlesBKramer/" eudora="autourl">
https://www.provideocoalition.com/CharlesBKramer/<br>
</a></body>
</html>