Source: https://www.bitlaw.com/source/tmep/1108_02_d.html
Timestamp: 2018-08-19 07:58:04
Document Index: 622591870

Matched Legal Cases: ['§1108', '§1108', '§1051', '§2', '§2', '§2', '§2', '§2', '§1051', '§2', '§1107']

TMEP 1108.02(d): Identification of Goods/Services, Oct. 2017 Ed. (BitLaw)
TMEP 1108.02(d): Identification of Goods/Services
1108.02: Requirements for Request for an Extension of Time to File a Statement of Use
Previous: §1108.02(c) | Next: §1108.02(d)(1)
1108.02(d) Identification of Goods/Services
In an extension request, the applicant must identify or reference the goods/services on or in connection with which the applicant has a continued bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce. 15 U.S.C. §1051(d)(2); 37 C.F.R. §2.89(a)(3), (b)(3). The goods/services identified in the extension request must conform to those identified in the notice of allowance. 37 C.F.R. §2.89(f). If the applicant wants to delete goods/services from the application, the applicant should clearly specify those goods/services to be deleted.
The applicant may incorporate by reference the goods/services listed in the notice of allowance. See 37 C.F.R. §2.89(f). This is advisable where applicant intends to retain all the goods/services identified in the notice of allowance, to avoid the possibility that goods/services may be inadvertently omitted. Thus, the applicant may specify all the goods/services in the notice of allowance by referring to "those goods/services identified in the notice of allowance" or "those goods/services identified in the notice of allowance except... [followed by a listing of the goods/services to be deleted]." Id.
If the applicant lists the goods/services with specificity in the extension request, and omits any goods/services that were listed in the notice of allowance, the USPTO will presume these goods/services to be deleted. 37 C.F.R. §2.89(f). The applicant may not thereafter request that the goods/services be reinserted in the application. Id. In this situation, the applicant cannot file a petition under 37 C.F.R. §2.66, claiming unintentional delay in filing an extension request for the omitted goods/services.
If an applicant files an extension request on a pre-printed paper form provided by the USPTO and fails to check either of the boxes available for identifying the goods/services on or in connection with which the applicant has a continued bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce, the ITU staff will assume that the applicant has a continued bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce on or in connection with all the goods/services identified in the notice of allowance, and will grant the extension request, if it meets all other requirements of 15 U.S.C. §1051(d)(2) and 37 C.F.R. §2.89. In re Omega-3 Mktg., Inc., 35 USPQ2d 1158, 1159 (Comm’r Pats. 1994).
If the applicant lists goods/services to be deleted and the result would be to delete all of the goods/services in the notice of allowance, or if the applicant fails to identify or incorporate by reference any goods/services, the USPTO will presume this was a clerical error. Applicant will be allowed to correct the mistake. The ITU staff will issue a letter noting that no goods/services were specified or incorporated by reference in the extension request, and granting applicant thirty days in which to submit a verified statement clarifying the goods/services. However, if by mistake the applicant lists goods/services to be deleted and removal does not result in the deletion of all goods/services, the goods/services specifically listed will be deleted and may not later be reinserted.
See TMEP §1107 regarding amendments to the identification of goods/services filed between the issuance of the notice of allowance and the filing date of the statement of use.