[E-trademarks] Sixth year Section 8 or new application for Supplemental registration? (both?)

[Bosland Law]

To LIndsey, Tim, Miriam, Richard, and Sam:  Keeping the existing
registration alive while working on the new app makes absolute sense,
thanks!

To Simor: Starting from scratch with the new application including a proper
full search does sound like the right approach.  Thanks for letting me
learn from your pain!


db

On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 10:59 AM Sam Castree <sam at castreelaw.com> wrote:

> Renewing the Supplemental registration can be helpful as a kind of
> back-up, just in case the 2(f) filing runs into problems (e.g. the
> examiner isn't convinced that there is enough evidence of acquired
> distinctiveness).  But that's about it, as far as I can tell.  And if you
> get started on the 2(f) appliaiton right away, then you'll get a response
> before the renewal deadline of the Supplemental registration, anyway.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sam Castree, III
>
> *Sam Castree Law, LLC*
> *3421 W. Elm St.*
> *McHenry, IL 60050*
> *(815) 344-6300*
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 12:51 PM Bosland Law via E-trademarks <
> e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi All!
>>
>>      If a client intends to pursue a new application for a Supplemental
>> registration after five years, is there any value to the year six Section 8
>> filing?  Or just do the new application with your 2(f) arguments and
>> evidence?
>>
>>      I'm guessing everyone but me knows the answer to this one...
>>
>>
>> db
>>
>> --
>> 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/20250422/bd1439fe/attachment.html>