<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Sylfaen;
panose-1:1 10 5 2 5 3 6 3 3 3;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;}
@font-face
{font-family:Garamond;
panose-1:2 2 4 4 3 3 1 1 8 3;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ligatures:none;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">I strongly recommend that these issues get raised to the Commissioner.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><b><i><span lang="DE" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#B02525;background:white;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">Janice Housey</span></i></b><span lang="DE" style="color:#B02525;background:white;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span lang="DE" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Sylfaen",serif;color:#B02525;background:white;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">Litmus Law PLLC<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span lang="DE" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Sylfaen",serif;color:#B02525;background:white;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span lang="DE" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Sylfaen",serif;color:#B02525;background:white;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">4 Weems Lane #240<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span lang="DE" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Sylfaen",serif;color:#B02525;background:white;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">Winchester, Virginia 22601</span><span lang="DE" style="color:#B02525;background:white;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span lang="DE" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Sylfaen",serif;color:#B02525;background:white;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">703.957.5274 office<br>
703.851.6737 cell</span><span style="mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:white"><span style="color:black;background:white;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"> </span><span style="mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif;color:#B02525;background:white;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><br>
ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION<br>
This communication is subject to the attorney-client privilege of confidentiality, and is intended only for the identified recipient. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and destroy all copies, hard and electronic, in your
possession. Thank you.</span><span lang="DE" style="color:#B02525;background:white;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"> </span><span style="mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Laura A. Genovese via E-trademarks<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 16, 2024 12:33 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Laura A. Genovese <lgenovese@kassgen.com>; charles.b.kramer@gmail.com<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [E-trademarks] Mark not examined in over three years: OR Franz Kafka's Secret Trademark Office<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Our office has a case in the exact same situation – a 3+ year old application blocking us and no examiner has yet been assigned. I followed the same path you did with the same result. Curious
to know if anyone else knows why there are ancient applications that still haven’t been assigned to an examiner.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> E-trademarks <<a href="mailto:e-trademarks-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com">e-trademarks-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Charles B. Kramer via E-trademarks<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 16, 2024 12:23 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com">e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Charles B. Kramer <<a href="mailto:charlesbkramer.tm@gmail.com">charlesbkramer.tm@gmail.com</a>>;
<a href="mailto:charles.b.kramer@gmail.com">charles.b.kramer@gmail.com</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [E-trademarks] Mark not examined in over three years: OR Franz Kafka's Secret Trademark Office<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">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 <a href="mailto:TrademarkAssistanceCenter@uspto.gov">TrademarkAssistanceCenter@uspto.gov</a> 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
<a href="mailto:TMPolicy@uspto.gov">TMPolicy@uspto.gov</a> 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">www.linkedin.com/in/charleskramer</a>
<br>
Tel: +1 917-512-2721<br>
Email: <a href="mailto:charles.b.kramer@gmail.com">charles.b.kramer@gmail.com</a> <--- for direct responses
<br>
Mail: 200 E. 10th Street, No. 816, New York, NY 10003<br>
Blog: <a href="https://www.provideocoalition.com/CharlesBKramer/">https://www.provideocoalition.com/CharlesBKramer/<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>