[E-trademarks] ID Manual Deletions

Narek Zohrabyan nzoh at philip.law
Mon Feb 19 14:22:05 EST 2024 

Kelcey,

I had this exact issue some years back. I can't recall the s/n of the
application but did a quick search of the TMEP.
1402.14  -  Identification of Goods/Services Must Conform to Rules and
Policies in Effect at the Time Registration is Sought

I think that is the section I used to get the EA back on track to using the
goods/services as it was filed, before the PTO adopted the new revision of
the NICE list.

Respectfully,

Narek Zohrabyan, Esq.





*Phil IP Law Inc.*

1055 East Colorado Blvd., Suite 5145

Pasadena, CA 91106



t: 1-619-929-0606

e: nzoh at philip.law

w: www.philip.law



Clients are assured that this is a confidential communication and is
protected by the attorney-client privilege. However, no communication
resulting herein shall create an attorney-client relationship unless a
separate retainer agreement, covering these issues, is signed by the
attorney and client. Outside counsel collaborating with our firm are also
protected by this privilege. Nevertheless, our firm would be obliged if you
could notify us if you have received an email by error. We would also
appreciate it if you could delete and not share the email because
mis-delivery is not a waiver of the privilege. Furthermore, no tax advice
is provided.


On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 9:04 AM <e-trademarks-request at oppedahl-lists.com>
wrote:

> Send E-trademarks mailing list submissions to
>         e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         e-trademarks-request at oppedahl-lists.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         e-trademarks-owner at oppedahl-lists.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of E-trademarks digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Black Diamond Question Mark ? (Ken Boone)
>    2. ID Manual Deletions (Kelcey Patrick-Ferree)
>    3. Re: ID Manual Deletions (Lara Pearson)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2024 18:42:27 +0000
> From: Ken Boone <boondogles at hotmail.com>
> To: "E-Trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com"
>         <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> Subject: [E-trademarks] Black Diamond Question Mark ?
> Message-ID:
>         <
> SA2PR02MB7722923F72E47EE4A035878FD5522 at SA2PR02MB7722.namprd02.prod.outlook.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> [Image for 98226210, select for more details]<
> https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=98226210&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch
> >
>
> A curiosity.  I noticed sometime last year that 98226210 had the word mark
> entry ESTD. 1593 LAMPERT RUM A?EJO A?OS PRODUCT OF PANAMA and I added that
> serial number to my list of questionable word marks (which now includes 325
> live trademarks).  Viewing the raw application on TSDR, the literal element
> provided was ESTD. 1593 LAMPERT RUM A?EJO A?OS PRODUCT OF PANAMA and my
> checks indicate that the two occurrences of ? are the standard character
> capital N tilde (decimal 209), so I was surprised that the automatic load
> of this TEAS filing corrupted the word mark.
>
> On Valentine's Day (February 14th), I noticed that the word mark entry was
> updated to ESTD. 1593 LAMPERT RUM AEJO A?OS PRODUCT OF PANAMA, not exactly
> the word mark correction I was anticipating by Pre-Exam when they added
> design codes to the record (though the word mark entry no longer includes
> the ordinary question mark{?}).  The good news: the search WD:/.*\?.*/
> retrieves only this rum trademark.  TSDR also shows the ? character in the
> description of mark:  The mark consists of a black background featuring the
> words "Lampert Rum" in gold stylized font across a diagonal red stripe,
> with a gray lion-like animal on each side of the word "Rum", the words
> "A?EJO" and "A?OS" in gold below the word "Rum", the phrase "PRODUCT OF
> PANAMA" below a stylized line, and having a crest with red and gold stripes
> and two gray castles with gold roofs therein and a gray lamb rising from a
> gold crown and red and gold flowers atop the crest, the crest being in the
> middle of the wording "Estd. 1593", all of the foregoing being
> substantially within a gold border against the black background.  The
> description of mark in the raw application looks fine.  The 13 February
> Notice of Design Codes document on TSDR for this application shows ESTD.
> 1593 LAMPERT RUM AEJO A???OS PRODUCT OF PANAMA (Stylized/Design) as the
> word mark.  (I would prefer LAMPERT RUM ESTD. 1593 A?EJO A?OS PRODUCT OF
> PANAMA as the word mark since LAMPERT RUM has the largest font in the
> drawing.)
>
> But what is ??
>
> Among the results of my internet search of "black diamond question mark":
> What does a black diamond with a question mark mean?
> replacement character ?
> The replacement character ?, a black diamond with a white question mark,
> is a symbol found in the Unicode standard at codepoint U+FFFD in the
> Specials table. It is used to replace an unknown or unrepresentable
> character, or indicate problems when a system is not able to render a
> stream of data to a correct symbol.Oct 28, 2018
> For my final search for this ? theme, I returned to Basic search mode,
> selected the Search by all option and searched /.*\?.*/, receiving an
> additional ? record, namely 98226594 (LN LA D? NIRVIQU?, another
> mid-October filing) with the following description of mark entry on TSDR:
> The mark consists of the wording "La?d?Nirviqu?" in stylized font and the
> image above the text looks like a shield. The raw application on TSDR has
> the following description of mark:  The mark consists of the wording "La d?
> Nirviqu?" in stylized font and the image above the text looks like a shield.
>
> Considering that these two ? trademarks are October filings, it will
> probably be several more months before examining attorneys will begin
> examining these trademarks?
>
> Happy Presidents' Day,
> Ken Boone
>
> PS - The null GS phenomenon continues to grow.  The search LD:true NOT
> (GS:* SN:8900* SN:81* ) currently retrieves 988 trademarks without GS
> entries, mostly new applications that presumably have to be manually
> corrected by Pre-Exam.
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240218/bde652b1/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2024 21:28:21 -0600
> From: Kelcey Patrick-Ferree <kpf at patrickferreelaw.com>
> To: "e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com Carl"
>         <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> Subject: [E-trademarks] ID Manual Deletions
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAOs1ubdH0BrC9ZEOYYvVfzwmSHApq9M6jY2wAjhJrawu_rxUMw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> All,
>
> Has anyone encountered descriptions that were in the ID Manual at the time
> an application was submitted being deleted before examination occurred? If
> the Examiner required a more definite description/amended description, has
> anyone successfully argued that the original ID is permissible because it
> was in the Manual at the time the application was filed?
>
> TMEP isn't very helpful on this one, just says IDs are updated
> periodically.
>
> Warm regards,
> Kelcey
>
>
> *Kelcey Patrick-Ferree *
> Attorney and Owner
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
> *Patrick-Ferree Law, P.L.L.C.*
> By Appointment: 136 S. Dubuque St., Iowa City, IA 52240
> Mail: P.O. Box 148, Iowa City, IA 52244
> Phone (IA): (319) 383-0659
> Phone (MN): (612) 568-5573
> Email: kpf at patrickferreelaw.com
> Web: https://patrickferreelaw.com
> Payments: https://patrickferreelaw.com/payments/
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240218/d729354e/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2024 19:51:25 -0800
> From: Lara Pearson <lara at brandgeek.net>
> To: "For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek
>         legal advice." <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> Cc: Kelcey Patrick-Ferree <kpf at patrickferreelaw.com>
> Subject: Re: [E-trademarks] ID Manual Deletions
> Message-ID: <E2533AA0-BA4A-4794-A663-5092848387B4 at brandgeek.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240218/32e9f437/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> E-trademarks mailing list
> E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of E-trademarks Digest, Vol 4, Issue 17
> *******************************************
>

[image: Mailtrack]
<https://mailtrack.io?utm_source=gmail&utm_medium=signature&utm_campaign=signaturevirality11&>
Sender
notified by
Mailtrack
<https://mailtrack.io?utm_source=gmail&utm_medium=signature&utm_campaign=signaturevirality11&>
02/19/24,
11:19:27 AM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240219/70940a0e/attachment.htm>

More information about the E-trademarks mailing list