[E-trademarks] Save Form Feature May Be Working Again

Greg William greg at danielsonlegal.com
Tue Dec 12 12:32:03 EST 2023 

Indeed - I was just able to save two applications.
-Greg

Gregory S. William, Esq.*
Danielson Legal LLC
One Mifflin Place, Suite 400
Cambridge, MA 02138
w: www.danielsonlegal.com
e: greg at danielsonlegal.com
t: (617) 714-9579
direct: (508) 865-2204
f: (888) 742-8097

*Licensed to practice in Massachusetts

This message is intended only for the designated recipient(s). It may
contain confidential or proprietary information and may be subject to the
attorney-client privilege or other confidentiality protections. If you are
not a designated recipient, you may not review, copy or distribute this
message. If you receive this in error, please notify the sender by reply
e-mail and delete this message. Thank you.


On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 12:27 PM Edward Timberlake via E-trademarks <
e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:

> It appears the "save form" feature may be working again?
>
> I was able to save a filing a few minutes ago (whereas earlier today the
> "Save Form" button was not even visible).
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Ed Timberlake
> *Board Certified Specialist in Trademark Law
> <https://www.nclawspecialists.gov/for-the-public/find-a-board-certified-specialist/results/detail/?id=29473>*
>
> *Timberlake Law* <http://timberlakelaw.com/>
> Chapel Hill, NC
>
> Schedule a call on Clarity <https://clarity.fm/edtimberlake>
> ed at timberlakelaw.com
> 919.960.1950
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 10:55 AM Carl Oppedahl via E-trademarks <
> e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
>
>> I'd guess that not one of the USPTO developers managing this particular
>> "update" to the TEAS software has ever in his or her life actually used any
>> of the TEAS forms involved here, in the actual service of a real client.
>>
>> I'd guess that the same may be said for whatever beltway bandit
>> contractor is being "managed" (using the term loosely ) by the USPTO
>> developers.
>>
>> I'd guess that if you were to put any of these people on the spot, their
>> stammered answer would be that so far as they knew, the "saved submission"
>> feature was sort of a "nice to have" thing but not actually really
>> important.
>>
>> Yesterday I received instructions from foreign counsel to carry out a
>> trademark renewal.  The fact pattern is complicated and there are layers of
>> communication involved.   I am not, for example, in direct communication
>> with the underlying client.  The TM registration has five trademark classes
>> in it.  The USPTO's proclivity to do "audits" on foreign renewals that have
>> lots of semicolons in the ID means that we have no choice but to worry and
>> worry about the many would-be specimens of use.  It is almost certain that
>> two or three or four versions of the would-be TEAS submission will need to
>> be generated and reviewed before the underlying client reaches a confidence
>> level as to everything about what will be contained and said in the
>> renewal.  There are time zones involved so that every iteration will
>> include a loss of at least a 24-hour cycle.
>>
>> Preparing this TEAS submission, and checking its correctness, took me
>> around an hour.
>>
>> In a normal TEAS workflow, I would save the submission each time, prior
>> to shipping the "click here" link off to foreign counsel.  Then the next
>> day when I hear back about the need to make some adjustment to the filing
>> package, I need merely reload the submission file and make the adjustment,
>> and the time required would be just a few minutes.
>>
>> Same thing a day after that when yet another review cycle has happened
>> and it turns out that yet another adjustment is needed.  Maybe against all
>> odds the client managed to snap one last photograph and now there is one
>> more specimen of use to add to the many specimens of use that had already
>> been uploaded to the submission.
>>
>> But instead of "one hour on the first day plus ten minutes a day later
>> plus another ten minutes a day later", this task for this client is going
>> to suck up maybe three hours of my time.   All because the saved-submission
>> feature has been broken for several days now.
>>
>> More importantly, every time I have to start from a blank form,
>> constructing the renewal package all over again, I have to check the
>> correctness of it from the top to the bottom.  Suppose that on the second
>> try or the third try, I inadvertently get it a little bit wrong on which
>> goods from class 10 are to be canceled and which are to be retained.  If
>> eventually that submission is the one that gets submitted and it turns out
>> I canceled something that was not supposed to be canceled, it is impossible
>> to get that item of goods back into the case.  There is an enormous
>> malpractice risk every time that I start over again from a blank form.
>>
>> My point here being that the USPTO developers probably have no clue, none
>> at all, about how wrong they are if they use "nice to have but not really
>> super important to have" as their way of characterizing the
>> saved-submission feature.
>> On 12/12/2023 7:40 AM, Richard Schafer wrote:
>>
>> Still broken today after three days of outage.
>>
>>
>>
>> This is significant egg-on-face territory for the PTO and reinforces the
>> opinion that the PTO’s IT department and their contractors are incompetent.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> *Richard A. Schafer | Schafer IP Law*
>> P.O. Box 230081 | Houston, TX 77223
>> M: 832.283.6564 | richard at schafer-ip.com
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com>
>> <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> *On Behalf Of *Carl Oppedahl
>> via E-trademarks
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 12, 2023 1:43 AM
>> *To:* For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek
>> legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
>> <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
>> *Cc:* Carl Oppedahl <carl at oppedahl.com> <carl at oppedahl.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [E-trademarks] Thanks for the six hours warning on Friday
>> evening that I can't save my draft form...
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you for posting.
>>
>> On 12/11/2023 12:35 PM, Tim Ackermann via E-trademarks wrote:
>>
>> Evidently, this is still broken -- you cannot save many of the TEAS
>> forms. No ETA on repair.
>>
>> https://www.uspto.gov/blog/ebiz/
>>
>> Tim Ackermann
>>
>> The Ackermann Law Firm
>>
>> E:  tim at ackermannlaw.com
>> P:  817.305.0690
>> F:  214.453.0810
>> W: ackermannlaw.com
>> O: 1701 W. Northwest Hwy. Ste. 100
>>      Grapevine TX 76051
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 9, 2023 at 3:10 PM Tim Ackermann <tim at ackermannlaw.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Posted at *06:24PM Dec 08, 2023*
>> <https://www.uspto.gov/blog/ebiz/entry/planned-events941> in Planned
>> Events  |
>>
>> Friday Dec 08, 2023
>>
>> Planned Events
>>
>> *Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) Save Feature Temporarily
>> Disabled on Some Forms*
>> The USPTO will be updating the TEAS forms below which requires us to
>> disable the save feature on those forms *beginning at 12:01 a.m. on
>> Saturday*, December 9 ET. An update will be posted on this page once the
>> save feature is restored.   You’ll still be able to:
>>
>>
>>    - Save certain forms, including initial applications
>>    - Upload data from previously saved forms
>>    - Submit all TEAS forms as usual
>>
>>  Saving will be temporarily disabled on the following forms:
>>
>>    - Change Address or Representation Form
>>    - Combined Declaration of Continued Use/Excusable Nonuse and
>>    Incontestability under Sections 71 and 15
>>    - Combined Declaration of Use and Incontestability Under Section 8
>>    and 15
>>    - Combined Declaration of Use and/or Excusable Nonuse/Application for
>>    Renewal of Registration of a Mark under Section 8 and 9
>>    - Declaration of Incontestability of a Mark under Section 15
>>    - Declaration of Use and Excusable Nonuse under Section 71
>>    - Declaration of Use and/or Excusable Nonuse of Mark in Commerce
>>    Under Section 8
>>    - Letter of Protest
>>    - Petition for Expungement or Reexamination Form
>>    - Petition to Revive Abandoned Application - Failure to File Timely
>>    Statement of Use or Extension Request
>>    - Petition to Revive Abandoned Application - Failure to Respond
>>    Timely to Office Action
>>    - Petition to the Director
>>    - Post-Publication Amendment
>>    - Request for Express Abandonment
>>    - Request for Extension of Time to File a Response
>>    - Request for Permission to Withdraw as Attorney of Record
>>    - Request for Reconsideration after Final Action
>>    - Request To Delete Section 1(b) Basis, Intent to Use
>>    - Response to Office Action
>>    - Response to Office Action for Post-Registration Matters/Response to
>>    Office Action for Post-Registration for Expungement or Reexamination Form
>>    - Response to Suspension Inquiry or Letter of Suspension
>>    - Section 7 Request Form
>>    - SOU Extension Request
>>    - Trademark/Service Mark Allegation of Use
>>    - Voluntary Amendment Not in Response to USPTO Office Action/Letter
>>    Form
>>
>>  Thank you for your understanding. If you have questions, email
>> *teas at uspto.gov* <teas at uspto.gov>.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Tim Ackermann
>>
>> The Ackermann Law Firm
>>
>> E:  tim at ackermannlaw.com
>> P:  817.305.0690
>> F:  214.453.0810
>> W: ackermannlaw.com
>> O: 1701 W. Northwest Hwy. Ste. 100
>>      Grapevine TX 76051
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-trademarks mailing list
>> E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com
>> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com
>>
> --
> E-trademarks mailing list
> E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20231212/5bd7b598/attachment.htm>

More information about the E-trademarks mailing list