[E-trademarks] Delay in Design Code Assignment

[Carl Oppedahl]

Thank you Scott and thank you Ken for posting.

I don't know enough about the internal workflow on this to make a 
confident guess as to the mechanism of action here for each of the 
various quality failures that Ken has been tracking (one of which Scott 
highlighted for us).  For example consider the quality failure that 
Scott bemoaned -- failure to assign design codes promptly.

  * /*Guess A. */Maybe the workflow for assignment of design codes has
    for years gone to some particular workgroup within the Trademark
    Office, and maybe starting a year ago or so, that workgroup got
    starved of resources.  So the work is just not getting done and is
    now backlogged worse than half a year.
  * /*Guess B. */Maybe the workflow for assignment of design codes has
    for years gone to some particular workgroup within the Trademark
    Office, and maybe starting a year ago or so, that task got
    reassigned to a contractor, and the contractor is failing to do the
    job promptly.  Meaning, among other things, the Trademark Office is
    not competently administering the contract.  So the work is just not
    getting done and is now backlogged worse than half a year.
  * /*Guess C. */Maybe the workflow for assignment of design codes has
    for years gone to some contractor, and maybe a year ago or so the
    Trademark Office decided to bring the task back in-house, and the
    Trademark Office is failing to handle this well.  So the work is
    just not getting done and is now backlogged worse than half a year.
  * /*Guess D. */Maybe the team of workers is pretty small, let's say
    five workers.  And design-code cases with a last digit of 0 and 1 go
    to worker 1, and design-code cases with a last digit of 2 or 3 go to
    worker 2, and so on.  And a year ago or so, workers 2 and 4 retired
    or got promoted or something, and very little attention has been
    given to the docket for those two workers.

For no reason other than guessing, I point to Guess C. Recall that there 
was the big push at the USPTO maybe five years ago to cut off some of 
Reed Publishing's most lucrative contracts, namely the contracts for 
typesetting and printing physical patents and physical trademark 
registration certificates.   The likely souring of the relationship with 
Reed probably had knock-on effects.  For example the handling of 
incoming faxes at the patent central fax number had been outsourced to 
Reed and now there is a three-month backlog on the patent side with 
handling of incoming faxes.

So what if Reed had, until say a year ago, been the outsourced 
contractor for assignment of design codes?  And maybe now that has 
soured and maybe has been (unsuccessfully) been brought back in-house.


On 2/23/2025 8:08 AM, Ken Boone via E-trademarks wrote:
> From my Some Quality Control Checks/Suggestions Using Trademark 
> Search posting yesterday, the search *SN:( /<79000000-79399439>/ ) AND 
> MD:unknown AND LD:true*  retrieved *456 *Madrid applications received 
> at the USPTO prior to 9 July 2024 that *_still have the UNKNOWN mark 
> drawing code - that Pre-Exam has yet to provide the appropriate mark 
> drawing code (and design codes) to those trademarks_*, some of which 
> are likely already under examination.  Similarly, the search *FD:[* TO 
> 20240708] AND MD:unknown AND LD:true NOT (SN:79* SN:89* ) *retrieves 
> *41* US applications filed prior to 9 July 2024 that still have not 
> been processed by Pre-Exam.
>
> It has been my experience that if an EA gets assigned an application 
> that Pre-Exam has skipped, the EA may not bother to update the mark 
> drawing code or add appropriate design codes, as that is not their 
> job.  Instead, the EA will often just look at the raw application.  I 
> saw an application recently where the EA did NOT notice that the GS 
> entries from the application were missing on TM Search and TSDR status 
> listing and approved the trademark for publication.  The application 
> then was now stalled for further review, likely because the 
> publication review noticed the GS text was missing and could not be 
> printed in the OG.  I dare say that application was one of the 
> applications that was retrieved by one of the QC searches in my 
> posting yesterday.
>    
> Maybe now you now see some significance for that QC Search posting?
>
> Ken Boone
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> on 
> behalf of Keller, Scott via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, February 23, 2025 6:50 AM
> *To:* e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> *Cc:* Keller, Scott <SKeller at wnj.com>
> *Subject:* [E-trademarks] Delay in Design Code Assignment
> Has anyone else noticed that it is taking a long time for design codes 
> to be assigned.  I just got a design code email on an application I 
> filed August 1, 2025.  It seems to me this used to happen within days 
> or at least a week of filing.  This had an effect on other 
> applications I filed because I found with two other applications that, 
> while the application was in TSDR, I could not prepopulate a Madrid 
> application.  I sent emails to Trademark assistance and after I 
> received the design code designation email, the Madrid would 
> prepopulate.  It is going to be an issue for Madrid applications if 
> this is the standard practice now to wait over 6 months before issuing 
> the design code designations and prepopulation cannot occur until 
> then.  I know I can just fill in the whole Madrid application, but 
> that is time consuming and can lead to errors that would not occur 
> with pre-population.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250223/1c3e74a4/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4751 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250223/1c3e74a4/attachment.p7s>