[E-trademarks] Madrid Processing Blues

Fri Jul 18 15:32:01 UTC 2025

A follow-up of the Madrid applications received Thursday, July 10th.  The USPTO still boasts

We are currently examining new applications submitted between:
January 16, 2025 - January 30, 2025

Further, the Current wait times webpage<https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/application-timeline> states that the Pre-Examination Unit averages 0 (zero) days on average for processing Madrid applications.

Trademark Processing Times
Average
Target
Pre-Examination Unit
TEAS
152 days
10 days
MADRID
0 days
10 days
Doesn't that mean that on average, Madrid applications are processed by Pre-Exam the same day that the applications are received?

7/11 Results
7/12 Results
7/18 Results
#
Search
Counts
%
Counts
%
Counts
%
1
SN:( /<79427310-79427730>/ ) AND LD:true
421
100.0%
421
100.0%
421
100.0%
2
SN:( /<79427310-79427730>/ )  AND MD:unknown
421
100.0%
183
43.5%
127
30.2%
3
SN:( /<79427310-79427730>/ )  NOT ON:*
79
18.8%
79
18.8%
79
18.8%
4
SN:( /<79427310-79427730>/ ) NOT GS:*
79
18.8%
79
18.8%
79
18.8%
5
SN:( /<79427310-79427730>/ ) NOT IC:*
79
18.8%
79
18.8%
79
18.8%
6
SN:( /<79427310-79427730>/ ) NOT WD:*
95
22.6%
95
22.6%
95
22.6%

>From search #2, the UNKNOWN mark drawing code counts dropped from 421 last Friday to 183 last Saturday.  While that's significant progress, it's far from 100%.  But doesn't the average of 0 days for processing new Madrid applications mean that all the applications should have been processed by Pre-Exam on Thursday, July 10th when the applications were received, that none of the 421 Madrid applications received on July 10th would have the UNKNOWN mark drawing code on July 11th, when those applications first appeared on Trademark Search?  Today, 127 of the applications (30.2%) received July 10th still have the UNKNOWN mark drawing code, indicating that one week later,  Pre-Exam still has not processed all the Madrid applications received July 10th completely.  How can the average Madrid processing time be zero days if 30.2% of the applications received July 10th still have not been processed a week later?

Searches #3 (missing owner names), #4 (missing GS text) and #5 (missing IC data) still have not improved since the initial load to Trademark Search on July 11th.  I'm assuming Pre-Exam is responsible for completing the data entry for those missing data fields, though the Madrid Processing Unit should be screaming bloody murder that so many Madrid applications received July 10th failed to load completely via the initial data transfer.

Concentrating on just those Madrid applications received on July 10th with filing dates prior to January 16th, the search

SN:( /<79427310-79427730>/ ) AND MD:unknown AND FD:[* TO 20250115]

retrieves 10 older applications, namely:

#
SN
FD
  GS
  OW
1
79427360
12/26/24

2
79427373
01/14/25

3
79427374
08/23/24

4
79427381
12/17/24

5
79427382
12/17/24
IC 035: Advertising
Nippon Denshin Denwa
6
79427432
11/22/24
IC 025: Clothing; fo
Jade Thirlwall (UNKN
7
79427519
11/25/24
IC 009: Downloadable
SORTING HAT TECHNOLO
8
79427522
01/09/25

9
79427593
11/11/24
IC 035: Retail servi
ITURAN LOCATION AND
10
79427639
01/14/25
IC 003: Cosmetics; m
Islestarr Holdings L

For this older application listing, GS and OW text is truncated to at most 20 characters merely to show the data voids occurring in multiple trademarks.

The Current wait times webpage<https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/application-timeline> also states the following (highlighting mine).

Difference between average wait times and current examination dates
You may have noticed that the average processing wait times do not match the current examination dates. The current examination dates show the most recent applications assigned to examining attorneys for review.
In general, average wait times are shorter than the current examination dates, because while we typically assign applications in the order they are received, some applications get placed higher in the queue.

  *   If the same applicant files more than one application within a three-month period, we place them all (up to 10 total applications) in the queue with the one that was filed first.
  *   Madrid applications are placed in the queue according to their effective filing date, which is the date their international application was filed.

though IMO that does not clarify why so many Madrid applications still have not been processed by Pre-Exam.  Well, a considerable number of older TEAS filings still have not be processed by Pre-Exam too, but that's another search for another day.

Uuuuuuuuuuuuuugh!!!
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: Friday, July 11, 2025 10:51 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>
Subject: [E-trademarks] Madrid Processing Blues

Yesterday was Thursday, a day that typically includes a new batch of Madrid filings arriving at the USPTO from the IB.  I decided to check on Trademark Search to see what survived the initial USPTO processing.

By my queries on Trademark Search, the lowest 79-series serial number with the July 10th mailroom date for the application is 79427310 and the highest is 79427730,  The brief search session below provides a quick summary of that 79427310 to 79427730 serial number range.

#
Search
Results
%
1
SN:( /<79427310-79427730>/ )
421
100.00%
2
SN:( /<79427310-79427730>/ )  AND MD:unknown
421
100.00%
3
SN:( /<79427310-79427730>/ )  NOT ON:*
79
18.76%
4
SN:( /<79427310-79427730>/ ) NOT GS:*
79
18.76%
5
SN:( /<79427310-79427730>/ ) NOT IC:*
79
18.76%
6
SN:( /<79427310-79427730>/ ) NOT WD:*
95
22.57%

Search #2 indicates none of the Madrid applications received yesterday have been processed by Pre-Exam yet.  Not surprising and very likely to change by Monday.

Search #3 indicates the initial processing failed to extract any owner name for 79 of the 421 Madrid applications received yesterday.  Seriously?  I thought the whole idea of exchanging international applications was that the electronic data transfer would be over 99% accurate, that maybe a stray error requiring manual correction might occur at most for only 1 or 2 applications per 100 (or was that at most 1 or 2 applications per 1000?).

Searches #4 and #5 for IC and GS data show similar errors as search #3.  Coincidence?  Or did the error occurring on one of the three fields block successful processing of the other two fields?

I invite you to perform the 6th search and scroll though the 95 trademarks retrieved.  Clearly many of the drawings suggest a wordmark was appropriate.  For a few that I checked, the raw applications were standard character marks.  Why doesn't the initial USPTO processing capture the standard character claims for TSDR and Trademark Search?

Call me disappointed (and embarrassed).

Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuugh!!!!!
Ken Boone

PS - The USPTO now boasts

We are currently examining new applications submitted between:
January 16, 2025 - January 30, 2025

Just looking at recent US filings in the 98-series and 99-series, the search

(SN:98* SN:99* ) AND LD:true AND FD:[* TO 20250115] AND MD:unknown

retrieves 470 live US applications filed prior to January 16th that have yet to be processed by Pre-Exam.  Huh?

Appending my awaiting assignment to an examining attorney criterion, the search

(SN:98* SN:99* ) AND LD:true AND FD:[* TO 20250115] AND MD:unknown AND SA:("new application in the record" AND "not assignment to examin" )

indicates 436 of those 470 older applications filed prior to January 16th still have not been assigned to EAs.  Well, I guess we should pity the 34 examining attorneys who are prosecuting applications that haven't been processed by Pre-Exam.  By a quick look, these 34 applications are all pending, but since the SA - Status field is not included in the Excel file exported by Trademark Search, I cannot provide the current status of these 34 applications.  So it goes.

  #
SN
FD
WM
1
98481384
04/05/24
Q-RUN
2
98483445
04/04/24
FRESHNOUS
3
98506234
04/18/24
BALDKNOBBER ARMAMENT
4
98707910
08/20/24
DR SUGAR LABS
5
98726292
08/30/24
ALFAJORES JORGITO
6
98727663
08/31/24
DINKOUTER
7
98727668
08/31/24
PHANHKERTP
8
98729085
09/02/24
ETOHUITECH
9
98731649
09/04/24
BANYCOOL
10
98734763
09/05/24
HAMAKAN
11
98743706
09/12/24
HONG KONG GATHERING HUB INTERNATIONAL TRADE
12
98760540
09/20/24
WINDSTUBBER
13
98775776
09/29/24
ZAFARO
14
98779299
10/01/24
GLAMFUTURE
15
98779588
10/01/24
LUPINERY
16
98782874
10/02/24
17
98788873
10/07/24
NEWAXIS
18
98788956
10/07/24
THE PELVIC PERSPECTIVE
19
98791668
10/09/24
ANDOV
20
98794042
10/12/24
HANDHELD SHOWER HEADS
21
98798034
10/12/24
COOL MOUNTIAN
22
98802004
10/15/24
MOKOBOIZ
23
98803220
10/16/24
SUFTY
24
98810629
10/20/24
RUCULA
25
98823245
10/31/24
FURENDO
26
98826667
10/29/24
YEAH, RIGHT GEAR
27
98828237
10/30/24
BIORR
28
98828346
10/30/24
PRIMENEST
29
98828402
10/30/24
BELISMIA
30
98860184
11/30/24
725AUDIO
31
98860187
11/30/24
725PROPEN
32
98875861
11/28/24
LA'PORTE
33
98917355
12/22/24
SWIPEL
34
98920914
12/24/24
ROMSION

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250718/4a5c866b/attachment.html>