<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Here is a search you should have done on the USPS web site.</p>
<p><img src="cid:part1.hc0YNNxE.wCtlsqkc@oppedahl.com" alt=""></p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Any time you are opening a new US
trademark file for a first-time trademark client, there is no
choice but to do this lookup in the Zip code engine at the USPS.
The reason for doing this is to look to see if the USPS considers
the mailing address to be a <i><b>commercial mail receiving
agency (CMRA). </b></i>Here the extremely important piece of
information gained is that the answer for this client is "no".
The USPS does<i><b> not</b></i> consider this Gould Street mailing
address to be a commercial mail receiving agency (CMRA).<i><b> </b></i>Which
is good news. <br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">See <a
href="https://blog.oppedahl.com/the-commissioner-for-trademarks-definitely-discards-the-cmra-data-that-it-receives-from-the-usps/">blog
article</a> and <a
href="https://blog.oppedahl.com/lets-see-if-the-commissioner-for-trademarks-is-now-paying-attention-to-cmra-information/">blog
article</a>.<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">But yes as another commenter points
out, the USPS will also often do its own research, trying to
detect if the evil applicant gets its office space by renting
space in a Regus or Wework or some other shared office space.
Because after all (apparently, based upon Trademark Office
behavior) there is a apparently a presumption (nearly
irrebuttable) that any applicant like that is evil. And thus must
reveal where the owner sleeps at night.</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Or heaven forbid the client happens to
rent an office in a building where other commercial tenants also
have offices. This, too, is apparently a red flag that the
applicant must be evil. If they were legitimate (the way the
Commissioner looks at it) they would be so big that they own the
building. <br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">But yes, if the address is a CMRA, then
this will often be a flag to treat the applicant as evil and to
demand that the owner reveals where he or she sleeps at night. <br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 6/30/2025 11:31 AM, Charles Kramer
via E-trademarks wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAF0igf9k_AN_OK0KicSO+K7C5t9SmehCpgc1tRtoyyxU8JqWZA@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">My client tells me the LLC registration service it
uses provided a "real" address:<br>
<br>
30 N Gould Street<br>
Suite [omitted here]<br>
Sheridan, WY 82801<br>
<br>
There appears to be a bunch of registrations by owners organized
in Wyoming, and using the same address, based on my somewhat
crude search: OW:30 AND OW:gould AND OW:wyoming AND LD:true but
perhaps they were lucky, or predate the current policy on review
of Domicile addresses.<br>
<br>
In the worst case, my client could see what happens - and if
flagged, decide how to respond then.<br>
<br>
<b>Suggestions?</b><br>
<br>
Many thanks for comments....<br>
<br>
- Charles<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</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>