[E-trademarks] DSCM - General Guidelines - Graphic Missing For Guideline 15 ?!?!? (That Color Lining Graphic)

Fri Mar 1 09:27:40 EST 2024

For anybody who might be interested, symbols used to represent colors in
drawing of marks are referenced in each the following sections of the
Design Search Code Manual:

Guideline 15

Table of Categories 29 (Miscellaneous)

Alphabetical Index [under the name of each color]

As Ken mentions, Guideline 15 somewhat awkwardly currently mentions a chart
that is does not display,

"Prior to November 2, 2003 an applicant was allowed to represent color in a
mark by using a color lining system. The color lining system required
applicants to line their drawings using certain patterns designated for
certain colors, and to provide a color lining statement describing where
the colors appeared. The color lining system is represented in the chart
below:"

Presumably, the missing graphic would look something like this (which is
how it appears in the MPEP):

[image: 608-Disclosure.png]

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 Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 7:46 AM Ken Boone via E-trademarks <
e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:

> FYI - Responding to Pamela Chestek's comment, "I'm not sure where you can
> find a copy of the patterns, I couldn't locate it quickly in the TMEP."  I
> recall adding that color lining graphic to the DSCM about 15 to 20
> years ago, but I couldn't find it in the current DSCM.  Looking more
> thoroughly, that graphic apparently got *misplaced* with recent updates
> to the DSCM.
>
> In the email below, I alerted the USPTO to restore that color lining
> graphic to the DSCM as quickly as possible.
>
> Hope this helps,
> Ken Boone
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Ken Boone <boondogles at hotmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, March 1, 2024 6:35 AM
> *To:* TMFeedback <tmfeedback at uspto.gov>; TMDesignCodeComments at USPTO.GOV <
> TMDesignCodeComments at USPTO.GOV>
> *Subject:* DSCM - General Guidelines - Graphic Missing For Guideline 15
> ?!?!?
>
> In the Design Search Code Manual (DSCM), in the General Guidelines
> section, at the end of Guideline 15, the following text appears.
>
> Prior to November 2, 2003 an applicant was allowed to represent color in a
> mark by using a color lining system. The color lining system required
> applicants to line their drawings using certain patterns designated for
> certain colors, and to provide a color lining statement describing where
> the colors appeared. *The color lining system is represented in the chart
> below:*
> [image: Sample drawings for design code Guideline 15]
> Some applicants continue to file for color marks using this system. The
> drawing in these applications will be lined as indicated above and the
> application will contain a claim to a specific color or colors. The coder
> should only code marks as color marks if both the color lining and color
> statement appear in the application. As with all marks for color alone,
> there are no words, letters or numbers in the mark.
> The highlighted text presumably is the alternate text for the graphic that
> was supposed to be displayed there, namely the graphic mentioned in the
> previous sentence (*The color lining system is represented in the chart
> below:*).
>
> It appears that the relevant image file somehow was lost when the USPTO
> updated the DSCM from using the search engine for the retired TESS to the
> new search engine used in the new Trademark Search.  I hope that graphic
> showing the different patterns used to represent colors in trademark
> drawing prior to November 2, 2003 can be restored ASAP.
>
> Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter.
>
>
>
> Ken Boone,
> Former IT Specialist at the USPTO (Retired)
>
> PS: The following E-Trademark discussion group posting prompted me to find
> that *color lining* graphic (*highlighting* mine).  Isn't that graphic in
> the TMEP or elsewhere on the USPTO website?  Apparently the *color lining*
>  graphic is difficult to locate.
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *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:* Thursday, February 29, 2024 5:43 PM
> *To:* e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> *Cc:* Pamela Chestek <pamela at chesteklegal.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [E-trademarks] Mark description in registration describes
> colors, but no claim to color made--what happens if renewal specimen uses
> different colors?
>
> Is the drawing not lined for color? Applications filed before November
> 2003 could use a drawing in black and white with various lining patterns
> used to represent different colors. See TMEP 808.01(b). So it sounds like
> it may actually have a color claim that, presumably, matches the
> description.
>
> *I'm not sure where you can find a copy of the patterns, I couldn't locate
> it quickly in the TMEP.* But I'm sure someone on this list knows where it
> is! Used to be in the CFR.
>
> Pam
>
> Pamela S. Chestek
> Chestek Legal
> 300 Fayetteville St.
> Unit 2402
> Raleigh, NC 27602
> +1 919-800-8033
> pamela at chesteklegal.com
> www.chesteklegal.com
>
>
>
> On 2/29/2024 6:25 PM, Kevin Grierson via E-trademarks wrote:
>
> Hi folks, this is a weird one.  Inherited a fairly old registration (filed
> 2001, registered 2004) with lots of scanned paper filings, so I’m having a
> hard time figuring out what happened, but my client has a registration for
> a mark with a design component.  The application and registration do NOT
> reference a claim to color, but the mark description DOES, so for example,
> if the mark was ACME next to a flag, the description reads “The mark
> consists of the word ACME in red next to a flag consisting of red and white
> stripes.”    The application was based on a foreign registration in color;
> my guess is that the original counsel omitted (forgot?) the color claim but
> described the original foreign mark in the application.
>
>
>
> 20+ years later, client has decided to change the color scheme, so now
> ACME is in green and the flag has green and white stripes.  Would a
> specimen in the new color scheme filed with a Section 8 declaration be
> accepted?  As noted, the registration doesn’t claim color (and for what
> it’s worth, the office’s official drawing is in black and white) but the
> specimen would not match the description of the mark. Thankfully, we
> recently filed the second renewal with a specimen that matches the colors
> in the description, but I’m thinking down the road about the next renewal
> and whether it makes sense to file a new application now.
>
>
>
> I have looked through the TMEP at the sections dealing with mark
> descriptions, but all the sections I’ve found deal with pre-registration
> review issues, not what effect (if any) an inaccurate description has on
> post-registration filings.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Kevin
>
>
>
> *Kevin Grierson <https://www.culhanemeadows.com/attorney/kevin-grierson/>*
> * (he/him)*
>
> Partner, Intellectual Property Group
>
>
> --
> 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/20240301/f05ff9a1/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 608-Disclosure.png
Type: image/png
Size: 171217 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240301/f05ff9a1/attachment.png>