[E-trademarks] Trademark Search Vs TSDR Live/Dead Mismatches - 65 Older Dead Registrations Via SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" )

Fri Feb 7 20:42:46 UTC 2025

As you likely guessed, the other 20 live/dead mismatches for the 65 older dead registrations of the 81 series were corrected on Trademark Search on February 1st (the next day).  Well, sort of, but I'm sure you'll agree that the corrections performed were incomplete.

The search SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) still retrieves those 65 older dead registrations of the 81 series.  The search SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) AND LD:false confirms all 65 are now dead, but the search SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) AND LR:true retrieves 20 of those 65 older dead registrations of the 81 series.  Somehow, the LR (Live Registration field) still considers 20 of those older dead registrations to be live.

Double-checking, the search LR:true retrieves 3,408,561 supposedly live registrations, but the search LD:true AND RN:* retrieves only 3,408,541 live registrations, and the search LR:true NOT ( LD:true AND RN:* ) retrieves the 20 live/dead mismatches.

Wait!  Here's another weird result.  The search SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) AND UD:[20231101 TO 20231109] retrieves those 20 mismatches.  It's like the USPTO is went back in time to early November 2023 to fix those last twenty SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) trademarks.

Below are the relevant lines from my search history.  (The first 5 searches of the session were about something else.)

Id
Query
ResultCount
6
LR:true AND MD:unknown
21
7
LD:true AND MD:unknown AND RN:*
1
8
LD:true AND MD:unknown AND PO:*
1
9
SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" )
65
10
SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) AND LD:true
0
11
SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) AND LD:false
65
12
SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) AND LR:true
20
13
LR:true
3408561
14
LD:true AND RN:*
3408541
15
LR:true NOT ( LD:true AND RN:* )
20
16
UD:20250201 AND ( LR:true NOT ( LD:true AND RN:* ) )
0
17
UD:[20250201 TO *] AND ( LR:true NOT ( LD:true AND RN:* ) )
0
18
UD:[20250101 TO *] AND ( LR:true NOT ( LD:true AND RN:* ) )
0
19
UD:[20250101 TO *] AND SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" )
45
20
UD:[20241201 TO *] AND SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" )
45
21
SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) NOT UD:*
0
22
SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) NOT UD:[20241201 TO *]
20
23
SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) NOT UD:[20241001 TO *]
20
24
SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) NOT UD:[20240101 TO *]
20
25
SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) NOT UD:[20231101 TO *]
0
26
SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) NOT UD:[20231110 TO *]
20
27
SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) AND UD:[20231101 TO 20231109]
20

BTW, the extra trademark for the 1st search (LR:true AND MD:unknown) is 76140440, the trademark

[Image for 76140440, select for more details]

that somehow became a live registration despite having the unknown mark drawing code.  Conveniently, it was last updated before 6 December 2024, so it has yet to have its wordmark entry deleted from Trademark Search. The description of mark is the mark consists of of the word IRINOX in stylized letters, so the stylized text mark drawing code appears to be appropriate.

________________________________________
Ken Boone

PS - Another curiosity.  Today, the following standard character mark appeared on Trademark Search.

[previously viewed                          Image for 79414775, select for more details]

I'm guessing the wordmark entry will surprise you, so you'll have to solve the puzzle of performing the appropriate wordmark search to retrieve this new standard character mark.  Good luck.

________________________________
From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> on behalf of Ken Boone via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2025 6:53 AM
To: For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Ken Boone <boondogles at hotmail.com>; TMFeedback <tmfeedback at uspto.gov>
Subject: Re: [E-trademarks] Trademark Search Vs TSDR Live/Dead Mismatches - 65 Older Dead Registrations Via SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" )

Breaking News: Today's update to Trademark Search corrects the status of 45 of the 65 older dead registrations of the 81 series from live to dead.

The search SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) still retrieves the 65 older dead registrations of the 81 series (in that TSDR and the retired TESS both showed these 65 trademarks as dead), so the status descriptions in the SA field on Trademark Search do not appear to have changed, but 45 of those 65 trademarks now appear as either DEAD or DEAD  CANCELLED on the results list presented by Trademark Search.  Here's a snapshot.

[cid:1d046641-d8d8-457b-85dd-5c3c4b811841]

The status changes to these 45 trademarks appears to be unique to Trademark Search, as I cannot see any evidence of any changes to the trademark records on TSDR for these 45 trademarks retrieved by the SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) search.

I'll admit that this is NOT the update that I expected. I expected all 65 trademarks retrieved by the SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) search to have the same status on Trademark Search, but now Trademark Search shows the 3 different status conditions DEAD or DEAD  CANCELLED or LIVE REGISTERED as captured in the snapshot above.

Exporting the 65 trademarks for the SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) search from Trademark Search, my checks show only 9 have GS entries, only 13 have filing dates, only 35 have IC entries, and only 30 have owner data. As the snapshot provided demonstrates, multiple trademarks lack drawings.

Happy Trademarking,
Ken Boone

________________________________
From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> on behalf of Ken Boone via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 5:20 PM
To: E-Trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Ken Boone <boondogles at hotmail.com>; TMFeedback <tmfeedback at uspto.gov>
Subject: [E-trademarks] Trademark Search Vs TSDR Live/Dead Mismatches - 65 Older Dead Registrations Via SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" )

This past weekend, I resolved (at least to my satisfaction) the SA - Status search for 65 dead trademarks in the 81 series that appear (in error) as live registrations on Trademark Search, a search puzzle simply because Trademark Search does NOT display the text of the SA - Status field.  With pit bull persistence, I found that the search SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) retrieves those 65 trademarks, all live registrations on Trademark Search but having the status registration cancelled as inadvertently issued on TSDR.  Of the two status text strings, only the term cancelled is common to both Trademark Search and TSDR, but it is somewhat reassuring that the search SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) retrieves exactly the 65 live/dead mismatches and no other trademarks.

I reported these 65 live/dead mismatches at least as early as 23 September 2023 (478 days ago) during the Beta testing of the replacement system for TESS that is now known as Trademark Search.

In October 2023, the following message appeared on the USPTO website.
info
We’re aware that in a small number of cases, the status shown in the new Trademark Search differs from the Trademark Status and Document Retrieval (TSDR) system. This is because we’re maintaining a legacy system, Trademark Reporting And Monitoring (TRAM), as well as an updated one, and the issue will resolve when we retire TRAM next year. Please use TSDR to verify status in the meantime.
Yet those 65 trademarks continue to appear as live registrations on Trademark Search today.  Maybe the legacy TRAM is resisting retirement?

The drawing for 81234899 is particularly relevant. It appears to be a scan of the registration certificate of the Bound Volumes, except the INADVERTENTLY ISSUED REGISTRATION stamp across the drawing likely appears in RED INK in the Bound Volumes (though I'm not on the USPTO campus to check, assuming the Bound Volumes still exist).

[Trademark image]

Of course, the SA - status text cancelled - restored to pendency is inaccurate.  If these registrations really were restored to pendency, the registration numbers (and registration dates) would have been removed from the electronic records.

Meanwhile, TSDR still show no correspondence for these 65 dead registrations - that if they were still pending applications in the 1980s, they would have long been declared dead for lack of maintenance.

My 23 September 2023 email includes another error reported, namely

But here's an unexpected twist in my analyses: Using the multi-search feature of TSDR (max 25 records at a time), the TSDR summary list shows these trademarks live registrations.  Huh?  So then I toggle to the individual TSDR display screen for a few of these records see the status

Registration cancelled as inadvertently issued.

which is the actual status that I anticipated.  So why did the TSDR multi-search summary screen show these 65 trademark records as live?  (Yes, some have drawings, but many are missing the filing date.)

By my checks today, that multi-search feature of TSDR error still occurs - that when searching these 65 live/dead mismatches using TSDR's multi-search feature, the summary listing still show these dead registrations as live.  Hmmm.

The other error in the PS section - that Trademark Search retrieved 73 trademarks when searching the 65 serial numbers with the SN: field tag - was presumably a syntax error for not including ( ) parentheses for that search (where the parentheses were unnecessary on TESS.  That is, the search SN:( 81029001 81046286 81068511 81119026 81135345 81141270 81142298 81144258 81148938 81148965 81153874 81157696 81161075 81162511 81169788 81172990 81182785 81190021 81191287 81201612 81202177 81209948 81213150 81217396 81218266 81221500 81225989 81226495 81231106 81231573 81234898 81234899 81234913 81236269 81238786 81239826 81242794 81242795 81242796 81242797 81242798 81242799 81245286 81245554 81245788 81246567 81247129 81248082 81248913 81248914 81251116 81254327 81256798 81261057 81261352 81265167 81268153 81274276 81276980 81284569 81286541 81288543 81297076 81299540 81337716 ) retrieves exact 65 trademarks, the same 65 trademarks as the SA:( "cancelled - restored to pendency" ) search.  I guess that was my search error, except no one from the USPTO bothered to reply with the proper search syntax with parentheses for Trademark Search for a list of serial numbers.

Happy Trademarking,
Ken Boone

________________________________
From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> on behalf of Ken Boone via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2023 12:05 PM
To: E-Trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Ken Boone <boondogles at hotmail.com>; TMFeedback <tmfeedback at uspto.gov>
Subject: [E-trademarks-L] More TESS Classic Versus TESS Beta Inconsistencies (Plus A TSDR Multi-Search Hiccup)

Below, I recorded the counts of live records for each series (first 2 digits of the serial numbers) for TESS Classic versus TESS Beta.  All searches were performed today.

TESS Classic
Hits
TESS Beta
Hits
Match
Diff
`SN >= 70000000 < 71000000 not dead[ld]
60
LD:true AND SN: 70*
              60
Yes
               -
`SN >= 71000000 < 72000000 not dead[ld]
7,202
LD:true AND SN: 71*
        7,202
Yes
               -
`SN >= 72000000 < 73000000 not dead[ld]
18,002
LD:true AND SN: 72*
     18,002
Yes
               -
`SN >= 73000000 < 74000000 not dead[ld]
57,645
LD:true AND SN: 73*
     57,645
Yes
               -
`SN >= 74000000 < 75000000 not dead[ld]
64,207
LD:true AND SN: 74*
     64,207
Yes
               -
`SN >= 75000000 < 76000000 not dead[ld]
87,527
LD:true AND SN: 75*
87,527
Yes
               -
`SN >= 76000000 < 77000000 not dead[ld]
118,018
LD:true AND SN: 76*
118,018
Yes
               -
`SN >= 77000000 < 78000000 not dead[ld]
168,907
LD:true AND SN: 77*
168,907
Yes
               -
`SN >= 78000000 < 79000000 not dead[ld]
140,911
LD:true AND SN: 78*
140,911
Yes
               -
`SN >= 79000000 < 80000000 not dead[ld]
208,815
LD:true AND SN: 79*
208,816
No
                1
`SN >= 80000000 < 81000000 not dead[ld]
2
LD:true AND SN: 80*
2
Yes
               -
`SN >= 81000000 < 82000000 not dead[ld]
14
LD:true AND SN: 81*
79
No
              65
`SN >= 85000000 < 86000000 not dead[ld]
223,813
LD:true AND SN: 85*
223,813
Yes
               -
`SN >= 86000000 < 87000000 not dead[ld]
314,386
LD:true AND SN: 86*
314,386
Yes
               -
`SN >= 87000000 < 88000000 not dead[ld]
540,112
LD:true AND SN: 87*
540,111
No
                1
`SN >= 88000000 < 89000000 not dead[ld]
563,439
LD:true AND SN: 88*
563,438
No
                1
`SN >= 89000000 < 90000000 not dead[ld]
3,000
LD:true AND SN: 89*
3,000
Yes
               -
`SN >= 90000000 < 91000000 not dead[ld]
613,207
LD:true AND SN: 90*
613,202
No
                5
`SN >= 97000000 < 98000000 not dead[ld]
789,763
LD:true AND SN: 97*
789,763
Yes
               -
`SN >= 98000000 < 99000000 not dead[ld]
183,295
LD:true AND SN: 98*
183,498
No
           203
Total Mismatches
           276

For TESS Classic, I was able to construct the searches in a spreadsheet, copy/paste all the searches to the search screen (to perform all the searches at one time), then copy/paste the session summary back to my spreadsheet, making that portion of the above summary table simple.  That is, I recommend that TESS Beta include both a multi-search option (e.g., separate multiple searches by semicolons like in TESS Classic) and generate a session summary with the searches and hit counts that searchers can copy/paste to emails or spreadsheet as records of the searches and search results.

The Diff column (far right column) is just the absolute value of the differences between search results for the two search systems,  Obviously, this is just the MINIMUM number of mismatches for live trademarks between the two systems per series.

Since the hit counts for the 81 series are low, I went to the trouble to identify the 65 live records that appear on TESS Beta but are not live on TESS Classic, namely

81029001 81046286 81068511 81119026 81135345 81141270 81142298 81144258 81148938 81148965 81153874 81157696 81161075 81162511 81169788 81172990 81182785 81190021 81191287 81201612 81202177 81209948 81213150 81217396 81218266 81221500 81225989 81226495 81231106 81231573 81234898 81234899 81234913 81236269 81238786 81239826 81242794 81242795 81242796 81242797 81242798 81242799 81245286 81245554 81245788 81246567 81247129 81248082 81248913 81248914 81251116 81254327 81256798 81261057 81261352 81265167 81268153 81274276 81276980 81284569 81286541 81288543 81297076 81299540 81337716

By my quick checks, none of those 65 serial numbers appear on TESS Classic, not even as dead records.

But here's an unexpected twist in my analyses: Using the multi-search feature of TSDR (max 25 records at a time), the TSDR summary list shows these trademarks live registrations.  Huh?  So then I toggle to the individual TSDR display screen for a few of these records see the status

Registration cancelled as inadvertently issued.

which is the actual status that I anticipated.  So why did the TSDR multi-search summary screen show these 65 trademark records as live?  (Yes, some have drawings, but many are missing the filing date.)

#
SN
FD
RN
Word Mark
Status
1
81029001
08/02/1973
1029001
live
2
81046286
1046286
GIF-02
live
3
81068511
05/13/1976
1068511
live
4
81119026
07/05/1977
1119026
live
5
81135345
1135345
BAGELMANIA
live
6
81141270
1141270
ULTRALITE
live
7
81142298
04/28/1978
1142298
live
8
81144258
06/08/1978
1144258
GUTS
live
9
81148938
02/01/1979
1148938
live
10
81148965
05/15/1979
1148965
live
11
81153874
11/27/1978
1153874
GATEWAYS TO S…
live
12
81157696
1157696
DIET WHIPPED
live
13
81161075
07/16/1979
1161075
live
14
81162511
01/28/1980
1162511
CHEMIHOE
live
15
81169788
1169788
TL
live
16
81172990
1172990
TEMPORALDISPE…
live
17
81182785
1182785
ARC-STRANGLER
live
18
81190021
1190021
PRO SKYER
live
19
81191287
05/15/1981
1191287
BRIDGEMAN'S
live
20
81201612
1201612
TOSHIBA
live
21
81202177
1202177
LA MONEGASQUE
live
22
81209948
01/01/1978
1209948
live
23
81213150
1213150
VALCAN CAL-STAT
live
24
81217396
1217396
SOLAR
live
25
81218266
1218266
SOLAR
live
26
81221500
1221500
A.M.L.
live
27
81225989
1225989
V & S VARIETY S…
live
28
81226495
1226495
FOR TRUE GROU…
live
29
81231106
1231106
SHEERPLAS
live
30
81231573
1231573
JUPON
live
31
81234898
1234898
WHAT'S BUGGIN…
live
32
81234899
1234899
live
33
81234913
1234913
FASTRAC
live
34
81236269
1236269
ITC BOOKMAN
live
35
81238786
1238786
ARMILLA
live
36
81239826
1239826
CTS
live
37
81242794
1242794
ITC LUBALIN GR…
live
38
81242795
1242795
ITC AVANTGARD…
live
39
81242796
1242796
ITC FRANKLIN G…
live
40
81242797
1242797
ITC FENICE
live
41
81242798
1242798
ITC ZAPF CHANC…
live
42
81242799
1242799
ITC NOVARESE
live
43
81245286
1245286
BOLT
live
44
81245554
1245554
COOKIE HOUSE
live
45
81245788
1245788
ASPI-VENIN
live
46
81246567
1246567
THE SUPER SPUD
live
47
81247129
1247129
SOCK SICLES
live
48
81248082
1248082
ION
live
49
81248913
1248913
ITC BENGUIAT C…
live
50
81248914
1248914
ITC BENGUIAT G…
live
51
81251116
1251116
ITC AVANT GARD…
live
52
81254327
1254327
CARBO-MIX
live
53
81256798
1256798
STUMPJUMPER
live
54
81261057
1261057
MRS. GOODHAM…
live
55
81261352
1261352
GRAND VELOUR
live
56
81265167
1265167
FIRINO-MARTELL
live
57
81268153
1268153
PACE
live
58
81274276
1274276
ITC CHELTENHAM
live
59
81276980
1276980
ECCO MILANO
live
60
81284569
1284569
MINIBANK
live
61
81286541
1286541
THE GALLEY
live
62
81288543
1288543
ENCO
live
63
81297076
1297076
MCDONALD'S
live
64
81299540
1299540
GLADIATOR
live
65
81337716
10/15/1984
1337716
live

Given the differences in hit counts for the various series, perhaps a similar review of dead trademark records for each series should be performed?  Alas, I've spent far more time on this analysis and now I'm too tired to continue ....

Happy Trademarking,
Ken Boone

PS - Another hiccup that I was too tired to analyze.  I took the list of 65 inconsistencies above and constructed the TESS Beta search

SN: 81029001 81046286 81068511 81119026 81135345 81141270 81142298 81144258 81148938 81148965 81153874 81157696 81161075 81162511 81169788 81172990 81182785 81190021 81191287 81201612 81202177 81209948 81213150 81217396 81218266 81221500 81225989 81226495 81231106 81231573 81234898 81234899 81234913 81236269 81238786 81239826 81242794 81242795 81242796 81242797 81242798 81242799 81245286 81245554 81245788 81246567 81247129 81248082 81248913 81248914 81251116 81254327 81256798 81261057 81261352 81265167 81268153 81274276 81276980 81284569 81286541 81288543 81297076 81299540 81337716

to double check my work, except that rather long search returns 73 records, not 65 records.  Huh?  Here's the text summary

73 results for SN: 81029001 81046286 81068511 81119026 81135345 81141270 81142298 81144258 81148938 81148965 81153874 81157696 81161075 81162511 81169788 81172990 81182785 81190021 81191287 81201612 81202177 81209948 81213150 81217396 81218266 81221500 81225989 81226495 81231106 81231573 81234898 81234899 81234913 81236269 81238786 81239826 81242794 81242795 81242796 81242797 81242798 81242799 81245286 81245554 81245788 81246567 81247129 81248082 81248913 81248914 81251116 81254327 81256798 81261057 81261352 81265167 81268153 81274276 81276980 81284569 81286541 81288543 81297076 81299540 81337716

So how does TESS Beta find 73 records for 65 serial numbers?  Well, hits #65 through #71 are 73-series records, and hit #73 is sn 85281559 (85 series).  Weird, huh, or does that TESS Beta search work correctly for you?  (Again, it would be NICE if I could do copy/paste of those 73 records directly from the TESS Beta hit list to this email, put prior attempts for copy/paste like that yielded UgLy results.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250207/7d7c99b3/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 49725 bytes
Desc: image.png
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250207/7d7c99b3/attachment.png>