[E-trademarks] Madrid Extensions - Refusals Must be Made within 18 Months

[Katherine Markert]

Hi All,

Has anyone had experience with the USPTO failing to issue a refusal against a 66(a) application within the 18-month period (relevant sections of TMEP pasted below)?  I am curious to know if the USPTO tried to issue an Office Action after expiration of the 18-month period.  If the USPTO fails to act within the required time, does the USPTO actually move the application on to publication (without resolving the "refusals")?  I am looking to get an understanding for how the rule is carried out in actual practice.  Thanks!

1904.02(g)    Refusal Must Be Made Within 18 Months

Under §68(c) of the Trademark Act and Article 5(2) of the Protocol, the USPTO must notify the IB of any refusal entered in a §66(a) application within 18 months of the date the IB transmits the request for extension of protection to the USPTO. See TMEP §1904.03(a)<https://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/TMEP/current#/current/TMEP-1900d1e1322.html>.

The Trademark database tracks the period of time within which the USPTO must notify the IB of a refusal of protection.  This information appears in the §66(a) international registration data field "Auto Protection Date."  If a refusal is not received by the IB as of this date, the mark receives automatic protection under Article 5(5) of the Protocol.

1904.03(a)    Notice Must Be Sent Within 18 Months

Within 18 months of the date the IB forwards a request for extension of protection, the USPTO must transmit:

  *   (1) A notification of refusal based on examination;
  *   (2) A notification of refusal based on the filing of an opposition; or
  *   (3) A notification of the possibility that an opposition may be filed after expiration of the 18-month period.  If the USPTO notifies the IB of the possibility of opposition, it must send the notification of refusal within 7 months after the beginning of the opposition period, or within one month after the end of opposition period, whichever is earlier.

15 U.S.C. §1141h(c)<https://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/TFSR/current#/current/sec-25e021ff-877e-48af-992d-5593a18d7808.html>; Article 5.

If the USPTO does not send a notification of refusal of the request for extension of protection to the IB within 18 months, the request for extension of protection cannot be refused.  15 U.S.C. §1141h(c)(4)<https://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/TFSR/current#/current/sec-25e021ff-877e-48af-992d-5593a18d7808.html>; Article 5(5); Regs. Rules 17(2)(iv), 18(1)(a)(iii).  If the USPTO sends a notification of refusal, no grounds of refusal other than those set forth in the notice can be raised more than 18 months after the date on which the IB forwards the request for extension of protection to the USPTO. 15 U.S.C. §1141h(c)(3)<https://tmep.uspto.gov/RDMS/TFSR/current#/current/sec-25e021ff-877e-48af-992d-5593a18d7808.html>.

If upon re-examination the examining attorney determines a new ground of refusal exists that should have been raised in the first Office action, a second Office action raising this new ground may be issued only if time remains in the 18-month period.  In such a case, the examining attorney must ensure that a notification of the new ground of refusal is sent to the IB.



[cid:image003.png at 01DA193F.343CBA00]
Katie Markert
Partner

Markert & Cominolli PLLC
Phone: 585-504-2507
Email: km at markertcominolli.com<mailto:km at markertcominolli.com>
Web: www.markertcominolli.com<http://www.markertcominolli.com/>
75 S. Clinton Ave., Suite 510, Rochester, NY 14604

[Title: LinkedIn - Description: image of LinkedIn icon]<http://www.linkedin.com/in/katherinemarkert>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20231117/822e8150/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 159 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20231117/822e8150/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 8515 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20231117/822e8150/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1437 bytes
Desc: image004.png
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20231117/822e8150/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 151 bytes
Desc: image005.png
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20231117/822e8150/attachment-0003.png>