Source: https://www.bitlaw.com/source/tmep/1202_08_f.html
Timestamp: 2018-02-19 19:28:49
Document Index: 481112986

Matched Legal Cases: ['§1', '§44', '§66', '§1', '§44', '§66', '§1202', '§1202', '§1', '§44', '§66', '§1', '§1051', '§1', '§1', '§1051', '§1', '§44', '§66', '§66']

TMEP 1202.08(f): Title of a Single Work in §1(b), §44, and §66(a) Applications, Oct. 2015 Ed. (BitLaw)
TMEP 1202.08(f): Title of a Single Work in §1(b), §44, and §66(a) Applications
1202.08: Title of a Single Creative Work
Previous: §1202.08(e) | Next: §1202.09
1202.08(f) Title of a Single Work in §1(b), §44, and §66(a) Applications
The issue of whether a proposed mark is the title of a single creative work usually is tied to use of the mark, as evidenced by the specimen. Therefore, generally, no refusal will be issued in an intent-to-use application under §1(b) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. §1051(b), until the applicant has submitted a specimen with an allegation of use under §1(c) or §1(d) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. §1051(c) or (d).
However, in a §1(b) application for which no specimen has been submitted, if the examining attorney anticipates that a refusal will be made on the ground that the proposed mark is the title of a single creative work, the potential refusal should be brought to the applicant’s attention in the first action issued by the USPTO. This is done strictly as a courtesy. If information regarding this possible ground for refusal is not provided to the applicant before the allegation of use is filed, the USPTO is not precluded from refusing registration on this basis. In cases where the record indicates that the mark constitutes the title of a single work, the examining attorney may make the refusal prior to the filing of the allegation of use.
In an application under §44 or §66(a), where a specimen of use is not required prior to registration, it is appropriate for examining attorneys to issue the refusal where the record indicates that the mark will identify the title of a single work. Cf. In re Right-On Co., 87 USPQ2d 1152, 1156-57 (TTAB 2008) (noting the propriety of and affirming an ornamentation refusal, which is otherwise typically specimen based, in a §66(a) application).