<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=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@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:"Segoe UI Emoji";
panose-1:2 11 5 2 4 2 4 2 2 3;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Avenir Next";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* 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:#467886;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;
font-variant:normal !important;
color:#0E2841;
text-transform:none;
text-decoration:none none;
vertical-align:baseline;}
.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="#467886" vlink="#96607D" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0E2841">Pulling the application from pub to issue the 2(d) is not just cognitive dissonance, it is also significant extra work for the examiner for negative compensation.
They received a credit for finally disposing of the application (approval) and would then have to lose that credit and spend time writing and researching the 2d refusal; then review the response and possibly issue another office action. They’ll get that credit
back again when the case is again disposed of (approved or abandoned), but that could be a year later. And the only obligation the examiner has to use the LOP evidence is if it would be “clear error” to not issue the 2(d) refusal. Consequently, if the examiner
can think of any reason or argument for not issuing the 2(d) refusal at this point in the prosecution, the examiner probably will not do so.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0E2841"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0E2841">No, if there is no 2(d) refusal being issued, then I think the application will keep progressing through publication and there will be no notice of a rejection
of the LOP. Or there might be a status line in TSDR that the examiner considered a LOP but still approved the application.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0E2841"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">Alex Butterman<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">Partner<b>
</b></span><b><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next",serif;color:#37428A"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next",serif;color:#37428A">DUNLAP </span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next",serif;color:#616A73">BENNETT </span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Avenir Next",serif;color:#37428A">& LUDWIG</span></b><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#156082;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:3.0pt"><i><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">211 Church St., SE; Leesburg, VA 20175<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:3.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">T: 703-777-7319</span><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#156082;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"> –
</span><span style="color:#156082;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><a href="https://www.dbllawyers.com/attorney/alex-butterman/"><b><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">BIO</span></b></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:3.0pt"><span style="color:#156082"><img border="0" width="167" height="49" style="width:1.7416in;height:.5083in" id="Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:image001.png@01DADC8F.2ED84390" alt="A blue and white logo
Description automatically generated"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:3.0pt"><a href="https://www.dbllawyers.com/empowering-innovators/"><span style="color:#0E2841;text-decoration:none"><img border="0" width="300" height="50" style="width:3.125in;height:.525in" id="Picture_x0020_3" src="cid:image002.png@01DADC8F.2ED84390"></span></a><span style="color:#156082"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#156082;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">This electronic message contains information from Dunlap Bennett & Ludwig PLLC and may be confidential or privileged. If you are
not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or use of the contents is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us and delete the message without copying or disclosing it.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#0E2841"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0E2841"><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 Geyer via E-trademarks<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 22, 2024 10:21 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 Geyer <lgeyer@ndgallilaw.com><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [EXT] Re: [E-trademarks] Question re Letter of Protest<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dear Anne:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Alas, my experience with post-publication letters of protest after initial examination is grim, and I’ve never succeeded in having one pulled from publication even when the issues seemed quite straightforward. I think it’s psychological
– nobody wants to second guess themselves, so especially if the Examiner saw already what’s in the LOP, it’s generally not going to work.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">What will generally happen is you’ll see that the LOP was forwarded to the examiner, and then the next thing is the mark publishing anyway without any discussion (which you wouldn’t have unless it did end up in a new 2(d)).
<span style="font-family:"Segoe UI Emoji",sans-serif">☹</span>It happens in the normal course if this is the case.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">If the examiner does pull it, it can be fast or slow depending/<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Now, of course, many times I’ve extremely frustratingly had a mark pulled from publication because the language the examiner approved is, on second thoughts, still too indefinite or OOPS there’s this 2(d) I missed (not a consequence of
an LOP). <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Sorry I can’t give better tidings. Maybe it will work for you!<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Kindly,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Laura<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:#174E86;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">Laura Talley Geyer</span></b><span style="color:#333333;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"> |
</span><b><span style="color:#666666;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">Of Counsel</span></b><span style="color:black;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:#174E86;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:#174E86;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">ND Galli Law LLC</span></b><span style="color:black;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">1200 G Street, N.W., Ste 800<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">Washington, DC 20005<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">Tel: (202) 599-9019 (direct)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://ndgallilaw.com/laura-geyer/"><span style="color:blue;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">https://ndgallilaw.com/laura-geyer/</span></a><span style="mso-ligatures:standardcontextual"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://ndgallilaw.com/"><span style="color:blue;mso-ligatures:standardcontextual">https://ndgallilaw.com/</span></a><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 <<a href="mailto:e-trademarks-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com">e-trademarks-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Anne Gundelfinger via E-trademarks<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 22, 2024 8:43 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com">e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com</a> Carl <<a href="mailto:e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com">e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Anne Gundelfinger <<a href="mailto:anne.gundelfinger@gmail.com">anne.gundelfinger@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [E-trademarks] Question re Letter of Protest<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="color:#CC0000">EXTERNAL EMAIL</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Hello Colleagues,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">In a situation where one files a Letter of Protest that is forwarded to the Examiner (as indicated in TSDR) very shortly after the Examiner approves an application for publication but well before
the application has been published, what exactly happens and how fast? Presumably, if the Examiner then chooses to issue an OA based on the grounds raised in the LOP, the Examiner would pull the application back and issue the OA, right? And if the Examiner
does issue an OA, how quickly can one expect that to happen? In the alternate scenario, if the Examiner decides no OA needs to be issued and the application can proceed to publication, will anything reflecting this decision show up in TSDR? Or will the application
just proceed to publication without any indication that the LOP was considered?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Many thanks for any wisdom you can share.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Anne Gundelfinger<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>