[E-trademarks] John's Post re the TTAB Jettisoning the USPQ

[reidl at sbcglobal.net]

Dear All,

 

I don't know how many of you caught up with John's TTABlog today about the
potential requirement that henceforth all citations to the TTAB will need to
be to WESTLAW.  To me, this sounds like a solution in search of a problem.

 

How many people are they going to hire to change all USPQ cites in the TBMP
to Westlaw cites?  And what about we old timers who have extensive libraries
of USPQ citations?  I know, the USPQ has only been published since 1929 but
it is still the standard.  And what about Federal Courts who prefer the USPQ
cites?  From my standpoint, I'd have to write a brief using USPQ cites and
then have the client pay an associate to translate that into WESTLAW cites.
Why impose that cost on us?

 

I have an open mind but would really like to know why the Board thinks that
changing the citation format it has used for its entire existence is
beneficial.  If I were still a solo, and one who did not subscribe to
Westlaw, I would have to do so in order to practice before the TTAB.  I know
that the universe of we folks who actually did legal research using dusty
books in dwindling, but still ..

 

I could understand saying that "for cases decided from now on you must cite
to Westlaw" but to redo history makes no sense for me.  

 


That said, I am equally bewildered by the MENSTRUATION CRUSTACEON decision.



 

Paul

 

Paul W. Reidl

Dickenson, Peatman & Fogarty

1455 1st St #301

Napa, CA 94559

707-261-7010 x 7210

 <mailto:preidl at dpf-law.com> preidl at dpf-law.com

@TMGuy

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240212/21c03981/attachment.htm>