[E-trademarks] [E-trademarks-L] Madrid description woes--USPTO won't suggest IB's proposed language from Notice of Irregularity

Wed Jun 5 19:11:44 UTC 2024

For starters, I would write to the Madrid list if you haven't.

My two cents:

/    Is "hosting a web site" really outside the scope of "providing a 
web site?" Is it worth arguing this point with the MPU Trademark 
Specialist?/

I think they're different. "Hosting" would be a place for third parties 
to set up a website, e.g., you're Blogspot, Wordpress or GitHub. 
"Providing a web site" is providing your own website, for example, one 
that might be informational, "providing a website on how to install 
faucet washers."

/    If I don't disagree with the WIPO Examiner's suggested changes, can 
I just not response and the mark will register with those changes?/

I would have to read the Notice of Irregularity, but I think it will say 
it will issue with the original ID, to which they will add a bracketed 
note saying that WIPO found the particular item unacceptable, which the 
various countries will take into account when they are examining the 
application.

Pam

Pamela S. Chestek
Chestek Legal
300 Fayetteville St.
Unit 2492
Raleigh, NC 27602
+1 919-800-8033
pamela at chesteklegal
www.chesteklegal.com

On 6/5/2024 2:29 PM, Heather Balmat via E-trademarks wrote:
> Anyone? Bueller?
>
>
>
> Balmat Law, PLLC
> 977 Seminole Trail, #342
> Charlottesville, VA 22901
> Tel.:  434-260-1837
> Fax:  434-473-6738
> http://balmatlaw.com/
> Twitter: @BalmatLaw
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Heather Balmat <hbalmat at balmatlaw.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 5, 2024 9:46 AM
> *To:* e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [E-trademarks-L] Madrid description woes--USPTO won't 
> suggest IB's proposed language from Notice of Irregularity
> Hi all,
>
> Resurrecting this thread, because I have encountered the same 
> situation described in Kevin's email below. I'm hoping for 
> confirmation that if I'm okay with the WIPO Examiner's proposed 
> changes, I can just not respond to the Notice of Irregularity and they 
> will make those changes and things will progress accordingly..
>
> The Notice of Irregularity only requests amendments to the ID, which I 
> thought were acceptable. My reading of the Notice of Irregularity was 
> that if I don't disagree, I don't have to respond, and the mark will 
> proceed to registration with the WIPO examiner's changes. I emailed 
> the MPU to confirm, and they told me that, no, I DO have to respond, 
> even to accept the changes. So, I did.
>
> Now I get the Denial of Response to Irregularity from the MPU - they 
> think that WIPO's suggested language of "hosting a web site" is 
> outside the scope of the original US description "providing a web 
> site" and so are refusing to forward my response to the IB.  So, my 
> questions for you:
>
> 1.
>     Is "hosting a web site" really outside the scope of "providing a
>     web site?" Is it worth arguing this point with the MPU Trademark
>     Specialist?
> 2.
>     If I don't disagree with the WIPO Examiner's suggested changes,
>     can I just not response and the mark will register with those changes?
>
>
>
> If it matters, some of the proposed changes involve moving services 
> between classes; otherwise, it's just tweaking the wording. I have 
> also just received a first OA on the US application requiring 
> amendments to the ID (but no movement between classes or new classes).
>
> Help?
>
> Thanks,
> Heather
>
>
>
> Balmat Law, PLLC
> 977 Seminole Trail, #342
> Charlottesville, VA 22901
> Tel.:  434-260-1837
> Fax:  434-473-6738
> http://balmatlaw.com/ <http://balmatlaw.com/>
> Twitter: @BalmatLaw
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> on 
> behalf of Pamela Chestek via E-trademarks 
> <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 12, 2021 10:10 AM
> *To:* e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> *Cc:* Pamela Chestek <pamela at chesteklegal.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [E-trademarks-L] Madrid description woes--USPTO won't 
> suggest IB's proposed language from Notice of Irregularity
> Perhaps have you amended the US ID already? I've had this happen 
> twice, doing exactly the same thing, and the MPU was very helpful. The 
> International application will reflect the ID as originally filed. So 
> if you cut and paste from what WIPO is asking, but in the meantime you 
> have amended the US ID (probably to narrow it), then the USPTO will 
> reject it as outside the scope of the current US ID. You have to take 
> the US ID and make the amendments to it that WIPO is requiring.
>
> Pam
>
> Pamela S. Chestek
> Chestek Legal
> PO Box 2492
> Raleigh, NC 27602
> 919-800-8033
> pamela at chesteklegal.com <mailto:pamela at chesteklegal.com>
> www.chesteklegal.com <http://www.chesteklegal.com>
>
> On 10/11/2021 4:01 PM, Kevin Grierson via E-trademarks wrote:
>>
>> Got an irregularity notice from the IB regarding a description of 
>> goods in an international application, with a suggestion for a 
>> revised description that appeared to me to be pretty much identical.  
>> So, I cut and pasted the IB examiner’s description into the response 
>> form and submitted it via TEAS.
>>
>> Just got an office action from the PTO’s MPU that the proposed 
>> revision “exceeds the scope of goods  . . . in the basic application.”
>>
>> Tried to call the examining “trademark specialist,” but her voice 
>> mail out of office message isn’t encouraging, as it says “Happy New 
>> Year” and says she’ll be returning in January of 2021.
>>
>> This is a new one on me—the PTO won’t let me make the change to the 
>> description that the IB wants.  Anybody encountered this catch-22 
>> before? In the alternative—are the examining offices in the 
>> designated countries really going to care if the IB attaches a 
>> statement that that the IB thinks the spec is too vague?
>>
>> *Kevin Grierson 
>> <https://www.culhanemeadows.com/attorney/kevin-grierson/>*
>>
>> Partner
>>
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/culhane-meadows-pllc>
>>
>> 	
>>
>> <https://www.facebook.com/CulhaneMeadows>
>>
>> 	
>>
>> <https://twitter.com/culhanemeadows>
>>
>> 	
>>
>> 	
>>
>> 757-726-7799 <tel:757-726-7799>
>>
>> 	
>>
>> 757-288-1235 <tel:757-288-1235>
>>
>> 	
>>
>> 866-521-5663
>>
>> 	
>>
>> kgrierson at cm.law <mailto:kgrierson at cm.law>
>>
>> 	
>>
>> *Atlanta | Austin | Boston | Chicago | Dallas | Delaware | Houston | New Jersey | New York | Philadelphia | Washington, DC 
>> <https://www.culhanemeadows.com/offices/>*
>>
>> This message is for the personal and confidential use of the intended 
>> recipient(s) and may be subject to attorney-client privilege. If you 
>> have received this communication in error, please notify the sender 
>> immediately. Please note that general marketing updates/legal news 
>> alerts provided by Culhane Meadows or its attorneys are for 
>> informational purposes only and should not be relied on as legal 
>> advice for any specific situation. Laws can change rapidly and, 
>> therefore, you should always consult with your CM attorney to ensure 
>> you have the most accurate and current counsel pertaining to your 
>> situation. 
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> E-trademarks mailing list
>> E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com  <mailto:E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
>> To unsubscribe, or to learn about list options, visithttp://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_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/20240605/1e88e288/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 16617 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240605/1e88e288/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 499 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240605/1e88e288/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 535 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240605/1e88e288/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 619 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240605/1e88e288/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 436 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240605/1e88e288/attachment-0004.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image006.png
Type: image/png
Size: 285 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240605/1e88e288/attachment-0005.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image007.png
Type: image/png
Size: 452 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240605/1e88e288/attachment-0006.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image008.png
Type: image/png
Size: 394 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240605/1e88e288/attachment-0007.png>