<div dir="ltr">I have only used TC for one simple application with a US owner, but based on Carl's email, I did a test run and can confirm that EUIPO is NOT an option for a 44d application.<div><br></div><div>As for entity types, noting how some Examining Attorneys treat Appendix D of the TMEP as a restrictive list, the failure to include common non-US entity types in TC will likely result in unnecessary office actions.</div><div><br></div><div><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Michael Brown<br>Michael J Brown Law Office<div>354 Eisenhower Parkway</div><div>Plaza I, 2nd Floor, Suite 2025<div>Livingston, NJ 07039<br><div><a href="mailto:michaeljbrownlaw@gmail.com" target="_blank">michaeljbrownlaw@gmail.com</a></div><div><a href="mailto:michael@mjbrownlaw.com" target="_blank">michael@mjbrownlaw.com</a></div><div><a href="http://www.mjbrownlaw.com" target="_blank">www.mjbrownlaw.com</a> <br>+1 973-577-6300 fax +1 973-577-6301<br></div><div>Google Voice +1 973-637-0358</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 6:50 AM Carl Oppedahl via E-trademarks <<a href="mailto:e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com">e-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><u></u>
<div>
<p>For a second time now I have attempted to use Trademark Center
instead of the more usual TEAS for the preparation of a US
trademark application.</p>
<p>For a second time, so far as I can see, Trademark Center is
unusable.</p>
<p>For a second time, I have been forced to go back to TEAS.</p>
<p>Here are the three defects that blocked my ability to use
Trademark Center today.</p>
<p>First, a false statement in the web-based system as to a
requirement about actual use for a 44e filing basis:<br>
</p>
<p></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Identify goods and services for Section 44(e)<br>
You must be using the trademark in commerce for all the goods
and services listed in your application.<br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I believe that it is false to say that in an application with a
44e filing basis, it is required that the applicant "be using the
trademark in commerce for all the goods and services listed in
your application." Instead, the law requires nothing more than a
<i>bona fide</i> intention to use the trademark in commerce for
all the goods and services listed in the application.<br>
</p>
<p>Second, when the time came to enter the details of the 44e filing
basis, so far as I could see it is impossible to set forth that
the filing basis is a registration <i><b>granted by the European
Union Intellectual Property Office</b></i>. So I was forced
to go back to TEAS since TEAS does recognize EUIPO as a selection
for the 44e office of earlier filing.<br>
</p>
<p>This is a sad repeat of a blunder made by the developers of
Patent Center. With Patent Center as released, it was impossible
to claim priority from a prior application filed in EPO (or in any
other regional patent office). It was clear in the case of Patent
Center that the developers stupidly just clicked around on the
Internet for some list of "all of the countries in the world" and
copied and pasted that list into the line of code that generated
the drop-down list of would-be priority Offices. Of course the
developers of Patent Center, who promised that they were going to
replicate all of the functions and features of EFS-Web, should
have done a simple code review of that part of EFS-Web and would
have seen that the drop-down list included some places <i><b>that
are not countries</b></i>. The European Patent Office is not
a country. But the developers of Patent Center had no clue that
the EPO is not a country, or that a customer of the USPTO might
need to claim priority from the EPO.</p>
<p>It took some weeks but eventually the developers of Patent Center
paid attention to our bug report from the Patent Center listserv,
and they fixed their mistake.<br>
</p>
<p>So here, too, what has apparently happened is the developers of
Trademark Center stupidly just clicked around on the Internet for
some list of "all of the countries in the world" and copied and
pasted that list into the line of code that generates the
drop-down list of would-be Offices for a 44e filing basis. Of
course the developers of Trademark Center, who represent to us
that they are supposedly replicating all of the functions and
features of TEAS, should have done a simple code review of that
part of TEAS and would have seen that the drop-down list included
some places <i><b>that are not countries</b></i>. The European
Union Intellectual Property Office is not a country. But the
developers of Trademark Center have no clue that the EUIPO is not
a country, or that a customer of the USPTO might need to list
EUIPO as a 44e filing office.</p>
<p>I did not trouble myself to go and look but I assume the
developers of Trademark Center made the same blunder for the
drop-down list of would-be 44d filing Offices.<br>
</p>
<p>The third defect in Trademark Center is the failure to provide
all of the relevant entity types in the relevant drop-down list.</p>
<p>In TEAS, when we get to "the entity is a non-US entity", what
happens next is that we get a drop-down list of non-US entity
types. On that drop-down list is, for example, "Société à
responsabilité limitée" (initialized as "SARL"). The drop-down
list has some seventy or so types of non-US entity.<br>
</p>
<p>In TEAS, we have been begging for years that the drop-down list
for no-US entity types would have a first selection for the non-US
country, and then based on this selection of country, we would <i><b>subsequently
</b></i>be given a drop-down list of the entity types <i><b>for
that country</b></i>. I imagine now that Trademark Center is
in front of us, we will never get this wish for TEAS because
probably TEAS has one foot in the grave.</p>
<p>But I digress. <br>
</p>
<p>In Trademark Center, once the filer clicks to say that the entity
type is a non-US entity, the drop-down list fails to provide
"Société à responsabilité limitée". The drop-down list also fails
to provide about sixty-eight other types of non-US entity.
Instead, the filer is forced to enter "Société à responsabilité
limitée" into a free-form data field. <br>
</p>
<p> Of course the developers of Trademark Center, who represent to
us that they are supposedly replicating all of the functions and
features of TEAS, should have done a simple code review of that
part of TEAS and would have seen that the drop-down list for
non-US entity types included <i><b>some seventy entity types.</b></i>
<br>
</p>
<p>Instead this particular defect in Trademark Center is going to
lead to endless opportunities for random variations in the stated
non-US entity type. We will see filers who capitalize some
letters and not others. We will see filers who enter the accent
characters and others who do not enter the accent characters. We
will see filers who enter an acute accent as a grave accent and
vice versa. There will, henceforth, be no consistency at all in
the entries for non-US entity types.</p>
<p>I invite comments from listserv members on these three defect
reports. Maybe for each of the defects as reported, it is not
really a defect because I missed some detail of Trademark Center.
Maybe for one or more of the defects as reported, there is some
workaround that I missed.<br>
</p>
</div>
-- <br>
E-trademarks mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:E-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">E-trademarks@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
</blockquote></div>