[E-trademarks] Recent Registration Date Processing Change?

[Sam Castree]

Honestly, I'm more relieved that  *RD:20240430*  yields the same number of
hits at the combination of *RD:20240430 AND RN:**  plus  *RD:20240430 NOT
RN:* *.  No weird, indeterminate third state.

Cheers,

Sam Castree, III

*Sam Castree Law, LLC*
*3421 W. Elm St.*
*McHenry, IL 60050*
*(815) 344-6300*



On Sun, May 5, 2024 at 11:15 AM Ken Boone via E-trademarks <
e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:

> I tried to do a quick check of registrations issued last Tuesday.
>
> The search *RD:20240430* retrieves 7,212 trademarks.  I assumed each
> would have a registration number.
>
> The search *RD:20240430 AND RN:** only retrieves 7,080 trademarks.  Same
> for the search *RD:20240430 AND SA:registered*.
>
> Alternatively, the search *RD:20240430 NOT RN:** retrieves 132
> trademarks.  Same for the search *RD:20240430 AND SA:review*.  Same for
> the search *RD:20240430 AND RG:supplemental*.  The Trademark Search
> *status* LIVE PENDING is reported for these 132 trademarks, while the
> TSDR has *Review prior to publication completed* as the status. (Well,
> the few I checked.)
>
> These unusual occurrences (registration date entries without corresponding
> registration numbers) got me looking for other such occurrences.  The
> search *RD:[* TO 20240505] NOT RN:** retrieves *191* trademarks.  That
> is, for registration dates up to today, 191 trademarks have a registration
> date entry but do NOT include a registration number.  Conveniently, that's
> a small enough count to export all 191 trademarks, and I have summarized
> those 191 trademarks by registration date (all calendar year 2024) in the
> following table.
>
> Reg. Date
> Principal Register
> Supplemental Register
> Total
> 02/20/24
> 5
> 0
> 5
> 03/19/24
> 17
> 1
> 18
> 03/26/24
> 41
> 0
> 41
> 04/30/24
> 0
> 127
> 127
> Grand Total
> 63
> 128
> 191
>
> (Okay, something is wrong with my summary, as I only list 127 instead of
> 132 trademarks for 04/30/24.  Ooops.)
>
> Is this an expected behavior - that the USPTO would load a registration
> date for a trademark record without a registration number?  Do you suppose
> this behavior is because the USPTO is *maintaining a legacy system,
> Trademark Reporting And Monitoring (TRAM), as well as an updated one, and
> the issue will resolve when we retire TRAM*?  Thoughts?
>
> Wait.  I observed a similar phenomenon with the published for opposition
> date field.
>
> The search *PO:20240430* retrieves 10,864 trademarks.  I assumed all
> those trademarks were published for opposition last Tuesday.  Not so fast.
> The search *PO:20240430 AND SA:published* only retrieves 10,734
> trademarks.  Alternatively, the search *PO:20240430 AND SA:review* retrieves
> 108 trademarks, where TSDR has the status *Review prior to publication
> completed* for the trademarks I checked.  (Expanding the date range via
> the search *PO:[* TO 20240430] AND SA:review* retrieves 11,324 trademarks
> {all live} with published for opposition date entries that have passed and
> the term *review *in the SA - Status field, though since that field is
> NOT displayed on TM Search ...) Again, is this the behavior that you
> expected for the published for opposition field?  Thoughts?
>
> Happy Trademarking,
> Ken Boone
> --
> 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/20240506/9a2eebb1/attachment.htm>