800-454-1360
GET IN TOUCHTrademark Registration [USPTO] - Process Overview
Step 1 - Trademark Search and Registrability Opinion Letter.
The first step, in the typical registration process of a trademark, is conducting a trademark search. A trademark search is a search of various trademark databases for the purpose of identifying identical or potentially similar/conflicting trademarks, their status, and their owners. The reliability of the trademark search results depends on the number and the quality of the databases searched, and on the search techniques used (wild cards, Boolean operators, phonetic searches, etc).
Is a trademark search needed? For most businesses, whether they are for-profit or non-profit, the answer is yes. It is wise to decide to invest in a business name, product or service name (or logo) only after you have a comfortable degree of certainty that the name or the logo is yours. Or at least, you should know the trademark risk you assume, before spending money and other resources with the registration of a particular trademark and its promotion through marketing.
What's the risk of not conducting a trademark search? That is what is called trademark risk. Trademark risk is the risk that someone else already applied for, or registered the same or a similar trademark, which may result in the registration being denied by the USPTO and the loss of the filing fees, among other things. In addition, it is the risk that someone else can claim rights in your trademark, or even worse, that someone else can claim superior rights to yours. If someone else can claim rights in your trademark, obviously your trademark is a weak mark. Furthermore, if someone else has begun using the trademark before you did, he is a senior user, and therefore, he may have superior rights in the trademark. A senior user may force you to stop using the trademark, and may sue you for trademark infringement. This is especially true when the senior user has the financial means to do so (e.g., a large corporation, etc).
Therefore, a trademark search should be conducted, preferably, before starting to use the trademark in commerce or before applying for registration, whichever occurs first. The scope of the search depends primarily on the budget available to the trademark owner. In other words, the scope of the search is a question of how much security the trademark owner can buy upfront.
Step 2 - Trademark Registration Application.
The second step, in the typical registration process of a trademark, is preparing and filing a complete trademark registration application with the USPTO. The trademark owner may do this on his own, pay for a filing service, or, pay a trademark attorney to conduct a preliminary review the information provided by the trademark owner, and prepare and file the application.
The preliminary review is very important as it can uncover obvious flaws or inconsistencies in the information provided by the trademark owner. These flaws, if undiscovered, may subject the application to a rejection by the examiner later. Here are examples of common flaws, which may cause trouble later during the prosecution of the trademark application: the trademark is descriptive of the goods and services; the mark drawing or the specimen are inappropriate; the filing basis is wrong; the description of goods or services is indefinite. A prior/preliminary review of the information provided by the trademark owner, by a trademark attorney, may help spot and, if not completely remove, at least reduce the number of these flaws before the application is filed.
Step 3 - Trademark Prosecution.
The third step, in the typical registration process of a trademark, is the trademark prosecution step. It comprises such actions as responding timely to any communications from the USPTO in regards to the status and/or the deficiencies of the application or the basis for rejection. Typically, few months after the filing of the application, a USPTO attorney/examiner will review the application, and if no deficiencies of the application or conflicts with other trademarks are found, the application is "allowed." From here, assuming no one will oppose the registration, it is generally only a matter of time before the certificate of registration is received by the trademark owner/applicant.
However, if the examiner finds that, for example, the proposed trademark conflicts with another registered trademark, or that the proposed trademark is descriptive of the goods or services associated with the trademark, he/she issues what is called a non-final Office Action. A timely response to the Office Action, using argument, evidence, etc, and addressing all the issues raised by the examiner, has to be prepared and filed with the USPTO in order to avoid abandonment of the application. If the examiner is convinced by the response, he/she will allow the application to proceed toward registration. Otherwise, he/she will issue a final Office Action. From here, typically, the options are to file a Request for Reconsideration and/or an appeal with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB).
Step 4 - Certificate of Registration.
Finally, once the application is "allowed," it will be published for opposition, and again, if no one opposes the registration of the trademark, the registration will be granted by the USPTO and a registration certificate will be mailed to the trademark owner. Typically, from the time the application is filed to the time the registration certificate is issued, it takes approximately 8-16 months.
PATENT and IP Law Blog
-
Marin Cionca9/13/2023 2:06:32 PM
So, who owns the “X” trademark? Is it Facebook or is it Elon Musk and his Twitter?
More -
-
Marin Cionca6/1/2023 11:29:01 PM
CIONCA IP WINS AT TTAB CANCELATION OF TRADEMARK REGISTRATION FOR ORANGE COUNTY CLIENT
More -
CIONCA IP - MC4/1/2023 5:21:45 PM
UNICOLORS, INC. v. H&M HENNES & MAURITZ L. P. – A Synopsis of a Copyright Infringement Case
More -
CIONCA IP - MC1/14/2023 2:21:06 PM
Broad specification or broad claims in a patent application?
More -
-
-
CIONCA IP (MC)7/13/2022 5:27:56 PM
Who is the owner of the trademark? Priority and Senior User Disputes
More -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
CIONCA IP TEAM (JM)10/8/2020 2:57:24 PM
Royal Crown Company Inc., Dr. Pepper/Seven Up Inc., v The Coca-Cola Company
More -
CIONCA IP TEAM (SG)10/6/2020 2:42:35 PM
Apple, Inc., v. Voip-Pal.com, Inc.: Sanction Orders and Obviousness
More -
-
CIONCA IP Team9/15/2020 5:11:49 PM
Comparing Apples to Apples: TTAB on In re Horizon Group USA, Inc.
More -
-
CIONCA IP Team8/31/2020 12:09:17 PM
Blackbird Tech LLC, DBA Blackbird Technologies, v. Fitbit, Inc., Wahoo Fitness LLC: Obviousness
More -
-
CIONCA IP Team7/20/2020 7:40:21 PM
Fitbit Inc. v. Valencell Inc.: Joint Parties in IPR Proceeding
More -
-
CIONCA IP 5/19/2020 7:36:30 PM
Uber Technologies, Inc. v. X One, Inc.: “Obvious to Try” Rationale
More -
-
-
CIONCA IP3/16/2020 8:43:10 PM
GS CleanTech Corporation v. Adkins Energy, LLC: Inequitable Conduct
More -
CIONCA IP3/10/2020 7:45:30 PM
Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Google LLC, Microsoft Corporation, Microsoft Mobile Inc.
More -
Marin Cionca2/9/2020 7:46:10 PM
Analogous Prior Art or Not? A critical patent obviousness question
More -
-
CIONCA IP 1/9/2020 4:43:58 PM
The Bigger Picture: TTAB’s Decision in In re James Haden, M.D., P.A.
More -
-
-
-
CIONCA IP10/16/2019 1:28:13 PM
To Use or Not to Use: The Statutory Period of Trademark Nonuse Prior to Presumed Abandonment
More -
-
-
CIONCA Team Member9/4/2019 7:20:46 PM
Guangdong Alison Hi-Tech Co. v. International Trade Commission: Objective Boundaries
More -
CIONCA Team Member8/19/2019 7:46:17 PM
In re Yarnell Ice Cream, LLC: Trademark Descriptiveness and Acquired Distinction
More -
CIONCA Team Member8/5/2019 2:29:33 PM
Is Speculation Enough Evidence for an Appeal?: General Electric Company v. United Technologies Corporation
More -
CIONCA Team Member7/5/2019 2:22:42 PM
In re: Global IP Holdings LLC: Broadening Claims Through Reissue Applications
More -
CIONCA Team Member6/27/2019 7:41:52 PM
Obviousness in a Single Prior Art Instance: Game and Technology Co., LTD., v. Activision Blizzard INC., Riot Games, INC.
More -
-
-
-
Marin Cionca4/17/2019 3:48:33 PM
What Qualifies as Proper Use in Commerce Claim in a USPTO Trademark Application?
More -
CIONCA Team Member4/3/2019 7:25:37 PM
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Designates Three Decisions Precedential
More -
CIONCA Team Member3/21/2019 3:49:43 PM
Defining Inherency: A Decision in Personal Web Technologies, LLC v. Apple, Inc.
More -
-
CIONCA Team Member2/19/2019 7:12:46 PM
Revised Guidance by USPTO on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility and Examining Computer-Implemented Functional Claims
More -
CIONCA Team Member2/5/2019 7:22:27 PM
TiVo Puts Tivoli on Pause: TTAB’s Decision in TiVo Brands LLC v. Tivoli, LLC
More -
Marin Cionca1/23/2019 9:45:30 PM
Patent Law Alert: All Sales of the Invention, Including Secret Sales May Invalidate a Patent
More -
CIONCA Team Member1/4/2019 4:12:21 PM
In re: Tropp: New Matter in a Continuation Can Be Relevant to Written Description Requirement
More -
CIONCA Team Member12/18/2018 6:12:48 PM
Schlafly v. The Saint Louis Brewery: The Registration of Merely a Surname
More -
-
-
CIONCA Team Member10/16/2018 6:50:31 PM
A Double-Edged Sword: Benefit of Priority or Longer Patent Term
More -
-
CIONCA Team Member9/17/2018 4:33:20 PM
Trademarks and Likelihood of Confusion: Federal Circuit’s Decision in In re: Detroit Athletic Co.
More -
Staff8/31/2018 7:26:58 PM
Patent Claim Interpretation By Federal Circuit's on Facebook's Contiguous Image Layout
More -
Staff8/16/2018 4:24:01 PM
Correcting or Changing a Patent After Issue Through the Central Reexamination Unit
More -
-
-
-
-
CIONCA Staff4/20/2018 5:25:25 PM
USPTO Changes Examination Procedure Pertaining to Subject Matter Eligibility in View of Berkheimer v. HP, Inc.
More -
CIONCA Staff4/13/2018 9:10:04 PM
It Take Two to Tango: Knowles v. Iancu, a Standing Dispute in a PTAB Decision
More -
-
3/8/2018 1:25:46 PM
Proceed with Caution: Consider Carefully when Narrowing Claims for Allowance
More -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
staff9/27/2017 5:00:12 PM
Claim Indefiniteness During Patent Pre-Issuance: Define Your Invention, Not Just Your Audience
More -
-
CIONCA Staff8/20/2017 3:16:11 PM
CIONCA on Patents: Think Twice Before Suing for Patent Infringement and Fight Back when Unreasonably Sued
More -
CIONCA - Staff8/9/2017 5:39:58 PM
Patent Case Study: The Novelty Of An “Invention” Is NOT Enough To Make It Patentable
More -
CIONCA - Staff6/28/2017 8:26:07 PM
Patent Law: Conditions Precedent May Expose Method Claim to Broad Interpretation During Prosecution
More -
CIONCA - Staff6/15/2017 5:32:14 PM
Patent Law: Challenging the Patent Claim Definiteness Requirement
More -
-
Marin Cionca2/21/2017 12:30:52 AM
Software Patent Law Update: Federal Circuit Finds Graphical User Interface Patentable
More -
Marin Cionca9/15/2016 9:47:39 PM
Patent Law Alert: Federal Circuit Opens Door for More Software Patents
More -
Marin Cionca9/6/2016 9:26:12 PM
Patent Case Law: New Example of Software as Patentable Subject Matter
More -
Iris Kim, PhD6/1/2016 7:04:50 PM
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board Designates Five More Decisions as Precedential
More -
-
Iris Kim, PhD3/25/2016 8:34:14 PM
Challenging a Claim’s Validity with Different Standards of Claim Construction
More -
I. Kim PhD2/26/2016 8:47:51 PM
The U.S. Supreme Court Will Review Claim Construction Standards and Institution Decision Reviewability.
More -
Marin Cionca2/16/2016 6:34:53 PM
In IPRs, patentees have to show that substitute patent claims are patentable
More -
-
Marin1/28/2016 9:15:16 PM
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board Designates Two Decisions as Precedential
More -
-
-
-
Marin11/18/2015 6:15:40 PM
Covered Business Method Claims Are Not Required to Particularly Target Financial Industry
More -
CONTACT INFO
TOLL FREE 800-454-1360-
GET IN TOUCH - SEE MORE CONTACT INFO
