Are your lug nuts tight?

Executive summary:  the other day I checked my lug nuts, assuming that they would all be nice and tight just like they always have been over the course of many years, any time that I have ever gone to the trouble of checking my lug nuts.  And I was gobsmacked to find that one of my lug nuts was loose enough that it could be turned using one’s fingers.  Yes, as soon as I realized it was loose, I tightened it to the desired number of foot-pounds.  But it sure was a good thing that I checked my lug nuts!

The main point of this blog article being, of course you should check your lug nuts.  Continue reading “Are your lug nuts tight?”

Trademark Office memory hole activity explained

(Updated, see below, to report events at the Trademark Office on May 24, 2022.  Yes I correctly predicted several aspects of what eventually did happen on May 24, 2022, as seen in the updates below.)

Well, folks, the USPTO has sort of vaguely and indirectly half-answered what happened last week with the 6001 US trademark registration numbers that were communicated to applicants and then got sent down the memory hole (blog article and blog article).  The explanation, such as it is, is that there was “a recent paper vendor disruption”.  Continue reading “Trademark Office memory hole activity explained”

Trademark Office’s memory hole efforts are incomplete

In a previous blog article, I described that the Trademark Office has tried to flush down the memory hole all traces of the 6001 US trademark registration numbers that it communicated to its customers on May 10, 2022.  And indeed right now, the registration numbers themselves, and the registration date, have gotten scrubbed out from where they were previously stored in TSDR and in TESS.

But the Trademark Office slipped up.  As of today, the XML data that it provides for those 6001 trademark applications continues to report a “status code” of 700, which means “registered”, and a “status text” of “REGISTERED”, which of course means registered.

To do a thorough job of scrubbing away evidence of its big mistake of May 10, the Trademark Office would also need to restore the “status code” to whatever it was before May 10.

I have loaded the 6001 cases into my IP Badger.  If and when the USPTO manages to scrub the “status code 700” information, I will see it.

Trademark Office goes down the memory hole

click to enlarge

(Update:  the 6001 customers did eventually get their registration numbers back two weeks later, on May 24, 2022.  See blog article.)

(USPTO published an explanation of sorts.  Blog article.)

Orwell’s 1984 imagines a dystopian future with a “memory hole”, which Wikipedia defines as

any mechanism for the deliberate alteration or disappearance of inconvenient or embarrassing documents, photographs, transcripts or other records, such as from a website or other archive, particularly as part of an attempt to give the impression that something never happened.

The morning of Tuesday, May 10, 2022 seemed like an ordinary Tuesday morning for trademark practitioners in the US.  Just like any other Tuesday, about six thousand US trademarks got registered.  But by Tuesday afternoon it became clear that this was no ordinary Tuesday.  By today (Friday the 13th), we see that the Trademark Office has gone down the memory hole, and has “disappeared” six thousand and one US trademark registrations.  Continue reading “Trademark Office goes down the memory hole”

Nice people from WIPO attended e-Trademarks listserv reception

click to enlarge

(Updated to report that the nice people at WIPO received the poster.  blog article.)

The e-Trademarks listserv reception took place as scheduled on Tuesday, May 3.  About seventy people attended.  I am delighted to report that two nice people from the Madrid Protocol part of WIPO attended the listserv.  We greeted them with an 18 inch by 22 inch (46 cm by 56 cm) poster with a “wish list”.  It was signed by about 41 of the listserv members.  I will be mailing the poster to our WIPO colleagues.  Here are the WIPO people and here is the “wish list”:  Continue reading “Nice people from WIPO attended e-Trademarks listserv reception”

What I wrote to a potential client just now

This morning an email message came in from a patent firm in a foreign country.  The email message was from a patent firm that we have not worked with before.  The email message told us that the patent firm has a client that filed a PCT application and is now interested in entering the US national phase.   The email message said:

Therefore, we would appreciate if you please provide your fees with a breakdown of firm’s fees and government fees, and any other fee that the client would incur, from the filing to registration as soon as possible.

I will tell you what I wrote back to this patent firm.  Continue reading “What I wrote to a potential client just now”

Director Vidal responds to Forty-two Patent Practitioners on PCT

click to enlarge

(Update:  we now have a phone call scheduled with the acting director of IPLA.  Read about it here.)

It was at 7:25 AM today (Eastern Time) that Forty-two Patent Practitioners wrote to Director Vidal, with eight “asks” relating to the Patent Cooperation Treaty, and sent a courtesy PDF copy of the letter by email.  Two minutes later, Director Vidal answered the email (see at right).  She wrote:

Thank you for reaching out on this … .  I appreciate it.  I will review it shortly.  Kathi.