[E-trademarks] Some Quality Control Checks/Suggestions Using Trademark Search

Ken Boone boondogles at hotmail.com
Thu Feb 13 18:54:02 UTC 2025 

>> How weird that the system apparently recognizes ê but not any of the other accented letters.

I doubt that characterization is 100% accurate.  I've seen plenty of occurrences of A-Z characters with diacritical marks (decimal values over 127) and other 8-bit characters (with decimal values over 127 that were generally characterized as special characters at the USPTO) that were generally handled fine (well, except for the occasional UTF-8 processing error hiccups).

And there are multiple systems (i.e., Madrid processing versus old TEAS versus new Trademark Center versus TSDR versus TRAM), plus any data transfer between systems could be a possible source of errors.

Evidently, there is a new version of TRAM that appears to handle Unicode characters of more than 8 bits (i.e., over the limit of 255 decimal for the old version of TRAM).  Does that include UTF-8 characters?  Does USPTO processing of wordmarks (such as the conversion to UPPER CASE) introduce unexpected occurrences of question marks or other conversion errors?

I've seen examples of Madrid standard character marks that have lost both the standard character claim and the wordmark entry.  Case in point, 79391525 - VISIONAPARTMENTS (which now has the UNKNOWN mark drawing code and no wordmark text, but the filing receipt shows VISIONAPARTMENTS was the wordmark captured from the filing (except that filing receipt shows the standard character designation was lost), so with the lack of any additional documents on TSDR, tracking how the wordmark was deleted is impossible for anyone outside the USPTO (but USPTO folks may have some audit files that could help in identifying the process that deleted the wordmark, not that they'll share that information with folks outside the USPTO).

Considering all that, I regret that TM Search doesn't include the Decimal Mark search field of the retired/deleted TESS, as we can no longer search wordmark characters by their decimal values to see where they appear.  Conversely, on TM Search, the letter ê is equated to all occurrences of e or E with all variations of diacritical marks, so track occurrences of ê (which likely does NOT occur in any wordmarks with the conversion of wordmarks to UPPER CASE only characters) versus any of È É Ê Ë è é ê ë Ē ē Ĕ ĕ Ė ė Ę ę Ě ě (and likely other Unicode/UTF-8 variations) is essentially impossible.

Any despite all that, my hobby of reviewing Trademark Search continues. Go figure.

Cheers,
Ken Boone

________________________________
From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> on behalf of Sam Castree via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2025 10:49 AM
To: For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Sam Castree <sam at castreelaw.com>
Subject: Re: [E-trademarks] Some Quality Control Checks/Suggestions Using Trademark Search

How weird that the system apparently recognizes ê but not any of the other accented letters.

Cheers,

Sam Castree, III

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



On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 10:36 AM Ken Boone via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>> wrote:
FYI - Today's report.  A small number of corrections appeared for the first 3 QC checks.  I added 2 more QC searches.
Ken Boone
________________________________
From: Ken Boone <boondogles at hotmail.com<mailto:boondogles at hotmail.com>>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2025 10:23 AM
To: TMFeedback <tmfeedback at uspto.gov<mailto:tmfeedback at uspto.gov>>
Subject: Some Quality Control Checks/Suggestions Using Trademark Search

With today's update to TM Search,  I see some small changes (corrections) for the first 3 QC searches.

#

QC Search

Today

Originally

Change
1
SN:( /<79000000-79398813>/ ) AND MD:unknown AND LD:true
445
449
4
2
FD:[* TO 20240630] AND MD:unknown AND LD:true NOT (SN:79* SN:89* )
76
79
3
3
(SN:( /<79000000-79398813>/ ) OR (FD:[* TO 20240630])) AND LD:true NOT ON:*
20
21
1
4
(SN:( /<79000000-79398813>/ ) OR (FD:[* TO 20240630])) AND LD:true NOT (GS:* SN:89*)
24
24
0
5
 LD:true NOT  FD:* COMMENT:"Live But No Filing Date - 98305614 97977848 97977833"
3
3
0
6
LR:true NOT LD:true      Comment:"Live Registrations But Actually Dead"
20
20
7
SN:( 75722562 79090344 79099220 79105611 79107274 79294728 79294737 79310411 79331990 79336276 79366512 79384354 79391101 85333307 86500939 88128956 88629495 90444281 90555410 90979979 97667505 97728652 97975969 98176859 98975063 ) AND LD:true AND WD:*?*
25
25

Towards continuous improvement of USPTO quality, I have added two (2) more QC searches.

Search #6 provides the illogical search result that there are 20 live registrations that are dead trademarks by the LD field.  By my checks, the LD search field has the correct DEAD status for those 20 trademarks (all older registrations for the 81 series). Apparently something unexpected occurred for the LR (Live Registration) field for these 20 trademarks. Below is a screenshot showing 4 of the 20 trademarks that currently satisfy search #6. (Yes, I wish I could do a copy/paste from Trademark Search {and TSDR} to emails instead of performing screen snapshots to document unexpected search results like this.)

[cid:ii_1950036844fcb971f162]


Search #7 returns 25 trademarks where the wordmark includes at least one question mark (?) where some other character appears in the drawing, so USPTO processing apparently corrupted the wordmark entry.  All 25 trademarks are standard character marks chosen randomly from my list of over 270 questionable wordmark entries.  From my perspective, the first USPTO task is to correct the wordmark entries, as these wordmark errors could impact LOC searches.  An additional USPTO task is to identify and fix whatever processes (or careless personnel) that corrupted the wordmark entries.  For your convenience, I provide the following listing of the current wordmarks and my recommended correction to the wordmarks. (Yes, most of these are live registrations.)


#

SN

FiledDate

®

Current Wordmark

Corrected
1
75722562
1999-06-08
®
PURET?
PURETÉ
2
79090344
2010-11-22
®
MAS MACI?
MAS MACIÁ
3
79099220
2011-04-15
®
LA VALL?E
LA VALLÉE
4
79105611
2011-04-14
®
WORL?E
WORLÉE
5
79107274
2011-10-17
®
K?STROLITH
KÖSTROLITH
6
79294728
2020-07-22
®
CL? DE PEAU BEAUT? EXFOLIANT DOUX ?CLAT SUPRÊME
CLÉ DE PEAU BEAUTÉ EXFOLIANT DOUX ÉCLAT SUPRÊME
7
79294737
2020-07-22
®
CL? DE PEAU BEAUT? SOIN MASQUE ?CLAT SUPRÊME
CLÉ DE PEAU BEAUTÉ SOIN MASQUE ÉCLAT SUPRÊME
8
79310411
2021-03-22
®
O?LOCK
O'LOCK
9
79331990
2021-12-07
®
DODONI PLANT?D
DODONI PLANT'D
10
79336276
2021-12-10
®
VACOM ? WE SUPPLY FUTURE
VACOM – WE SUPPLY FUTURE
11
79366512
2023-01-01
®
DON?T JUST TALK. SYNCH
DON'T JUST TALK. SYNCH
12
79384354
2023-06-28
SYREN?S CALL FOR RICHES
SYREN’S CALL FOR RICHES
13
79391101
2023-10-18
®
RESPIN ?EM IN
RESPIN ‘EM IN
14
85333307
2011-05-30
®
METAL?RGICA HASSMANN
METALÚRGICA HASSMANN
15
86500939
2015-01-12
®
?BER
ÜBER
16
88128956
2018-09-24
®
FL?NEUR
FLÂNEUR
17
88629495
2019-09-24
®
?Y LAS TORTILLAS ?
¿Y LAS TORTILLAS ?
18
90444281
2021-01-01
®
LEK?L, LEGLIZ, LAKAY.
LEKÒL, LEGLIZ, LAKAY.
19
90555410
2021-03-02
XR360?
XR360º
20
90979979
2021-04-29
®
ATTACH?
ATTACHÉ
21
97667505
2022-11-08
HOUSE OF L?ON
HOUSE OF LÉON
22
97728652
2022-12-22
X?PORT
X°PORT
23
97975969
2021-10-27
®
KLEMAN CL?ON MANUFACTURE
KLEMAN CLÉON MANUFACTURE
24
98176859
2023-09-12
®
ALLIR?G
ALLIRŌG
25
98975063
2023-06-05
VOTRE CH?TEAU BY PHINEAS GREYE
VOTRE CHÂTEAU BY PHINEAS GREYE


Hope this helps,
Ken Boone
USPTO IT Specialist (Retired)


________________________________
From: Ken Boone <boondogles at hotmail.com<mailto:boondogles at hotmail.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 4:47 AM
To: TMFeedback <tmfeedback at uspto.gov<mailto:tmfeedback at uspto.gov>>
Subject: Re: Some Quality Control Checks/Suggestions Using Trademark Search

Yesterday, I provided 4 Quality Control checks using Trademark Search.

Today, I repeated the 4 searches plus a new QC search and the trademarks retrieved.  The new search retrieves live trademarks having no filing date.  There were no changes with today's update to Trademark Search.





Date Search Performed
#

QC Search

02/11/25

02/12/25
1
SN:( /<79000000-79398813>/ ) AND MD:unknown AND LD:true
449
449
2
FD:[* TO 20240630] AND MD:unknown AND LD:true NOT (SN:79* SN:89* )
79
79
3
(SN:( /<79000000-79398813>/ ) OR (FD:[* TO 20240630])) AND LD:true NOT ON:*
21
21
4
(SN:( /<79000000-79398813>/ ) OR (FD:[* TO 20240630])) AND LD:true NOT (GS:* SN:89*)
24
24
5
 LD:true NOT  FD:* COMMENT:"Live But No Filing Date"
3
3

Following is a snapshot from Trademark Search of the results for the 5th search.  The 3 trademarks appear to be noise in the search database, so the LIVE PENDING status likely should be corrected to DEAD, but I haven't researched the specific problems of these 3 serial number records too deeply.  But if these trademarks are LIVE PENDING (as currently indicated on Trademark Search), the drawings are suspiciously blank and the both 97977848 & 97977833 are void of data.  Clearly, errors are evident in these 3 LIVE PENDING trademarks.

[cid:ii_1950036844fcb971f161]

Hope this helps,
Ken Boone
USPTO IT Specialist (Retired)


________________________________
From: Ken Boone <boondogles at hotmail.com<mailto:boondogles at hotmail.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2025 12:37 PM
To: TMFeedback <tmfeedback at uspto.gov<mailto:tmfeedback at uspto.gov>>
Subject: Some Quality Control Checks/Suggestions Using Trademark Search

Below are some quality control suggestions based on unexpected results using Trademark Search.

The USPTO currently indicates We are currently examining new applications submitted between: July 01, 2024 - July 15, 2024.  From that, I infer that Pre-Exam has completed their initial processing for all new applications file prior to July 1, 2024, so that all those applications would be ready for examination.
____________________

For Madrid applications, 79398813 appears to be the last serial number delivered 27 June 2024, so I expected that the search

SN:( /<79000000-79398813>/ ) AND MD:unknown AND LD:true

would fail to retrieve any trademarks - that all live Madrid applications for serial numbers 79000000 through 79398813 would have valid mark drawing code entries, not the 0 - UNKNOWN MARK DRAWING TYPE entry as displayed on TSDR (as Trademark Search currently does not display the mark drawing code).

Unfortunately, that search currently retrieves 449 live Madrid applications, indicating that Pre-Exam has not performed their initial processing for 449 live Madrid applications received at the USPTO prior to July 1, 2024.

Are examining attorneys expected to examine Madrid applications that have not been reviewed by Pre-Exam and likely require wordmark corrections, valid mark drawing codes, pseudomarks and possibly design search codes?

I expect 449 Madrid applications are far more than you care to see now, so I'll only list the 25 lowest serial numbers*, as they have been at the USPTO the longest. But simply copy/paste the search provided to Trademark Search to retrieve the full list of 449 older Madrid applications having the UNKNOWN mark drawing code.

#
Serial #
FiledDate
Wordmark
1
79382531
2023-07-17
2
79390295
2024-01-29
STEP UP NUTRITION
3
79390627
2024-02-06
CLAUDE MONTANA
4
79390628
2024-02-06
MONTANA
5
79390629
2024-01-18
6
79390630
2024-01-17
2BE
7
79390631
2024-01-26
FAST RETAILING
8
79390632
2024-01-25
GOOD MORNING UNIVERSE
9
79390634
2024-01-26
FAST RETAILING
10
79390635
2024-01-15
NATURAL CODE
11
79390639
2024-01-22
PKG
12
79390640
2024-02-09
13
79390641
2024-02-06
14
79390642
2024-01-26
EX DRY-EX
15
79390643
2024-01-26
UNIQLOCK
16
79390645
2024-02-06
17
79390647
2024-01-30
18
79390648
2024-01-26
WEAREX
19
79390649
2024-02-02
20
79390650
2024-02-05
21
79390651
2024-02-06
22
79390652
2024-02-06
VICAFE
23
79390654
2024-02-06
24
79390655
2024-02-06
25
79390656
2024-02-01

* This list was exported from Trademark Search. Some wordmark entries on TSDR are not included on Trademark Search for trademarks having the UNKNOWN mark drawing code.

Basically, I used the criteria that the searches provided concentrate on live trademarks received prior to July 1, 2024.

____________________

For US applications, I expected the search

FD:[* TO 20240630] AND MD:unknown AND LD:true NOT (SN:79* SN:89* )

would fail to retrieve any trademarks - that all live US applications filed prior to July 1, 2024, would have valid mark drawing code entries, not the 0 - UNKNOWN MARK DRAWING TYPE entry as displayed on TSDR.

Unfortunately, that search currently retrieves 79 live trademarks, where one of those trademarks has already progressed to registration.

Are examining attorneys expected to examine applications that have not been reviewed by Pre-Exam and likely require wordmark corrections, valid mark drawing codes, pseudomarks and possibly design search codes?

I'll only list the 25 oldest serial numbers*, where the first is the US application that has already progressed to registration (though it still lacks a valid mark drawing code).

#
Serial #
FiledDate
Wordmark
1
76140440
2000-10-05
IRINOX
2
97742991
2023-01-05
FLIPSHOPCART
3
98183254
2023-09-16
AESVANITOP
4
98183363
2023-09-17
SHUYE
5
98185711
2023-09-18
HOPLITO
6
98670609
2023-12-20
7
98346587
2024-01-08
8
98377127
2024-01-26
GLAM LIFE PARTY BUS
9
98483445
2024-04-04
FRESHNOUS
10
98481384
2024-04-05
Q-RUN
11
98490255
2024-04-09
HORIZON OPTIX
12
98505702
2024-04-17
13
98506234
2024-04-18
BALDKNOBBER ARMAMENT
14
98511473
2024-04-21
FLEE TO WILD
15
98511500
2024-04-21
VENTUSONUS
16
98514481
2024-04-23
P PROTECTIMUS
17
98514485
2024-04-23
STANDPOINT
18
98518754
2024-04-25
19
98519780
2024-04-25
20
98538540
2024-05-07
21
98550251
2024-05-14
M
22
98550897
2024-05-14
23
98559606
2024-05-20
24
98559803
2024-05-20
LOS INCOMPARABLES DE TIJUANA
25
98562810
2024-05-22
XENIES

____________________

The search

(SN:( /<79000000-79398813>/ ) OR (FD:[* TO 20240630])) AND LD:true NOT ON:*

retrieves older live trademarks without owner names, an indication that some error must have occurred in USPTO processing.  Obviously, no trademarks are expected to be retrieved by this search, but this search currently retrieves 21 live trademarks.  Clearly, corrections are warranted.

#
Serial #
FiledDate
Wordmark
1
90981101
2020-09-23
2
90981207
2020-09-24
INNOVATIVE CARE SOLUTIONS
3
79325618
2021-09-29
4
97978808
2022-11-18
5
97978567
2022-12-29
6
97978503
2023-01-23
AXE DEVTOOLS
7
79416400
2023-10-20
8
79390582
2023-11-06
POLIFORM
9
79390588
2023-11-29
SUNSHO PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD.
10
79390589
2023-12-13
JJ VODKA
11
79391532
2024-01-26
12
79416480
2024-03-27
13
79399924
2024-04-11
14
79416404
2024-05-02
15
79415504
2024-05-16
16
79415683
2024-05-21
17
79405680
2024-05-27
18
79415793
2024-06-12
19
79415688
2024-06-24
20
79416506
2024-06-24
21
79402974
2024-06-25


____________________

Every trademark should have GS entries, but the search

(SN:( /<79000000-79398813>/ ) OR (FD:[* TO 20240630])) AND LD:true NOT (GS:* SN:89*)

retrieves 24 older live trademarks without GS entries on Trademark Search.  Clearly something went wrong in the processings of these trademarks (and some of these trademarks appeared in previous lists).


#
Serial #
FiledDate
Wordmark
1
86984664
2013-09-23
THE HYPOCRITE
2
90981101
2020-09-23
3
90981207
2020-09-24
INNOVATIVE CARE SOLUTIONS
4
97978301
2022-07-27
V VENDR
5
97978808
2022-11-18
6
97978567
2022-12-29
7
97978503
2023-01-23
AXE DEVTOOLS
8
97874126
2023-04-05
HOLLYWOOD BEAUTY SECRETS EXPOSED
9
79416400
2023-10-20
10
98337844
2024-01-01
THE TASTE FROM OUTER SPACE
11
79391532
2024-01-26
12
79416480
2024-03-27
13
79399924
2024-04-11
14
79416404
2024-05-02
15
79415504
2024-05-16
16
79415683
2024-05-21
17
79405680
2024-05-27
18
79415793
2024-06-12
19
98606466
2024-06-18
20
98606904
2024-06-18
BROWN SINCE 1993
21
98614079
2024-06-22
MODUHOUZ
22
79415688
2024-06-24
23
79416506
2024-06-24
24
79402974
2024-06-25

____________________


Hope this helps,
Ken Boone
USPTO IT Specialist (Retired)
--
E-trademarks mailing list
E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto: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/20250213/768d8e00/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 53029 bytes
Desc: image.png
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250213/768d8e00/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 38181 bytes
Desc: image.png
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250213/768d8e00/attachment-0001.png>

More information about the E-trademarks mailing list