<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>My own experience with Trademark Center has been that it has,
from its initial launch, been riddled with bugs and missing
features from TEAS.</p>
<p>Recently I had been forced to deal with Office Actions where the
Examiner was having trouble working out the filing basis. These
are in applications that I filed in Trademark Center and I
distinctly recall that at the time of filing, Trademark Center
would not really allow me to select filing bases in a way that
made sense. I had a 44d priority claim and was not able to also
pick ITU as a separate click place. Very frustrating. The
application as filed contained proper ITU language as spelled out
in the Lanham Act, but not (apparently) in a way that was clearly
visible to the Examiner. Hence the Office Actions, in cases that
could otherwise have been instantly approved for pub. Extra work
for the Examiner and extra work for me.</p>
<p>Some weeks after those filings happened, I saw that this
particular part of Trademark Center had been modified by the
developers and after that, this particular problem seemed to have
been remedied.</p>
<p>There was also an early time in the life of Trademark Center that
it seemed to be impossible to present, in a single application,
both a priority claim and a 44e filing basis. The problem was
that one of the click path questions was "do you have a pending
foreign application?". And of course if the filer is trying to
present a 44e basis, then by definition the foreign filing is no
longer "pending" but is "registered". Within recent weeks,
however, I see that this part of Trademark Center has also been
modified by the developers and now this particular problem seemed
to have been remedied.</p>
<p>There are many, many more weaknesses and poor-design elements of
TC, and missing features that never got brought forward from TEAS,
that remain outstanding to this day. One simple practical gripe
is that a seemingly simple filing that would have taken me five or
six minutes to prepare in TEAS invariably sucks up well over
twenty minutes in TC. </p>
<p>Anyway, the overall impression I got is that no meaningful beta
testing with real paying customers ever took place back before the
cutoff of TEAS for new applications. Or, the more I think about
it, maybe TC beta testing did happen, and maybe TC beta testers
did report poor design elements and bugs and missing features, and
maybe it is simply that the reports fell on deaf ears. As
mentioned below, I myself served as alpha and beta tester on
Financial Manager and Patent Center, and I reported dozens of bugs
and missing features, and I think each and every report that I
provided fell on deaf ears. </p>
<p>I griped about this a few days ago to a couple of people at the
Trademark Office, and this is what I heard back today by email.
It is a big surprise. This email tells me that "dozens" of actual
members of this listserv supposedly beta-tested TC. Indeed
supposedly "five rounds of beta testing" of TC took place prior to
the cutoff of TEAS for new applications.</p>
<p>It is very hard to know how to react to this email from the
Trademark Office person. It sort of looks like finger-pointing,
like if there were defects in TC when it was placed into
production, then this is because members of this listserv did not
test TC well enough when they were beta testing it.</p>
<p>The email invites me to "volunteer" in the link for volunteering
to beta test USPTO systems. I served as a volunteer beta tester
about fifteen years ago for Financial Manager. I served as a
volunteer alpha tester for Patent Center back in 2018, and then
served as a beta tester of that system. As for the link in which
a person can volunteer, I volunteered in that link within days of
when that link got posted. But no, I did not get asked to
beta-test TC.</p>
<p>And no, I did not know that the PRA supposedly puts a cap on how
many beta testers are permitted ("9"). It sort of looks like a
made-up excuse for failing to do proper beta testing. The PRA was
in place back when I served as </p>
<p>If you as a listserv member were among the "dozens" that
supposedly really did participate in one or another of the "five
rounds of beta testing" prior to the beta release, I would be most
grateful if you could post something about the experience to the
listserv, or drop me a note privately. </p>
<p>If you as a listserv member were among the "dozens" that
supposedly really did participate in one or another of the
"several more rounds of testing following" the beta release, I
would be most grateful if you could post something about the
experience to the listserv, or drop me a note privately. </p>
<p>If you as a listserv member participated in one or another of the
"one-on-one user sessions", I would be most grateful if you could
post something about the experience to the listserv, or drop me a
note privately. </p>
<p>Given that the CX team is now decimated, with a staff size of
"1", and given how badly the rollout of TC went in its role as a
successor to TEAS as a way to file new trademark applications, I
am aghast that the Trademark Office would plow ahead with
continued cutoff of other TEAS functions. According to this
email, the next two TEAS functions to be cut off would apparently
be the Voluntary Amendment ("VA") form and the and Change Address
or Representation ("CAR") form.</p>
<p>If any members of this listserv get invited to beta-test the TC
successor to VA or the TC successor to CAR (or any other piece of
TC), I would be most grateful if you could post it to the
listserv, or drop me a note privately. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Your email was forwarded to me for further information about
Trademark Center testing. As you know, the Paperwork Reduction
Act constrains the research options of federal agencies, so our
customer experience team conducts standardized research using
groups of volunteers numbering 9 or fewer. We also conduct
direct observations and one-on-one user sessions.<br>
<br>
In the case of Trademark Center, there were five rounds of
testing prior to the beta release, and several more rounds
following. This testing is ongoing, albeit at reduced scope. Our
testing capacity has been adjusted since January as the CX team
has downsized to one person.<br>
<br>
Based on the names in the E-trademarks Archives on your site,
dozens of members of that list were invited to the beta or other
testing and participated. They had all signed up at the link
below in Ms. Jackson\u2019s email. We encourage you to sign up there
as well if you are interested in participating.<br>
<br>
You can also provide feedback directly to <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:TEAS@uspto.gov">TEAS@uspto.gov</a>, which
handles Trademark Center matters. Screenshots and a concise
description of the issue are always welcome. We are currently
revising the specimen upload and dates of use sections of the
initial application form based on feedback, and will soon offer
new features currently found in the Voluntary Amendment and
Change Address or Representation TEAS forms. </p>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>