<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Listserv member Ken Boone has put a lot of time into doing
searches for boundary conditions in the corpus of not-yet-examined
US trademark applications. He looks for cases that have been
outstanding for a long time, to try to draw patterns. Surely you
saw his posting to the listserv on March 26, 2024, for example, in
which he identified 182 old applications filed prior to calendar
year 2021.</p>
<p>One would have hoped that one or another of the dozen Trademark
Office lurkers on the listserv would have seen that posting and
might have shared it with whoever is in charge of this kind of
management. One would have hoped that in the time that passed
since March of 2024, somebody at the USPTO would have tried to get
some of those cases moving.</p>
<p>Ken posted his search strategy ( FD:[* TO 20201231] AND (SA:"
application assignment" ~5) AND OW:usa NOT (SA:" application
assignment" ~3)) and I tried that same search just now.</p>
<p>The count of applications is still 182. No progress on any of
those 182 cases.<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/16/2024 10:32 AM, Laura A.
Genovese via E-trademarks wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DM4PR19MB569011D881A615D9067F8699B9A22@DM4PR19MB5690.namprd19.prod.outlook.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator"
content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style>@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;}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.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:windowtext;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ligatures:none;}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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<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 class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" 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 class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com">e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Charles B. Kramer
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:charlesbkramer.tm@gmail.com"><charlesbkramer.tm@gmail.com></a>;
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" 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"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.linkedin.com/in/charleskramer</a>
<br>
Tel: +1 917-512-2721<br>
Email: <a href="mailto:charles.b.kramer@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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/"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.provideocoalition.com/CharlesBKramer/<br>
</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>