Sheldon Mak & Anderson - USIP.com

Friday, May 13, 2011

FRAUD ALERT RE TRADEMARKS


Applicants for foreign trademarks and U.S. trademarks are receiving fraudulent notices about their marks and need to check with their attorney before responding to any such notice. 

The first type of notice is a bogus invoice. The invoices can come from organizations that use initials such as OHMI, which are trying to confuse trademark owners and make them think the sender is OHIM. The OHIM (the genuine abbreviation for the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market) registers trademarks for the European Common Market – there is no OHMI. 

The second type is a warning that third parties are registering domain names containing the addressee’s trademark.  This type of fraud notice typically deals with Chinese domain names.

Do not respond to these fraudulent invoices and notices.  If you are using an attorney to register your marks, which is highly recommended, any legitimate invoices will come through the attorney.  If there is any doubt about the legitimacy of an invoice or notice notice, consult with an attorney before acting on it.

[+/-] read more...

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

USPTO Loses $100M From Budget

The latest Federal fiscal compromise (H.R. 1473) removes $100,000,000 from the Patent and Trademark Office budget.  Since the USPTO is totally self-supporting, that amount of collected user fees will now be diverted to other areas of government.  It appears that our representatives in Washington DC are using the USPTO as a cash cow to subsidize other government activities.  We find this troublesome.


This diversion of funds already appears to have changed Patent Office operations: One example is that the expedited patent prosecution program, recently reported in this blog, is now on hold.  This program would have created an opportunity for inventors to expedite their application’s prosecution by paying an additional $4,000 in filing fees to the Patent Office.  Why is the Patent Office cancelling a program that would generate more revenue?  Because the Patent Office would not get to keep that extra revenue, but would have some modest costs associated with the program.  So our Washington representatives have inadvertently killed a revenue generating program that would be useful for many inventors in the name of fiscal responsibility. 

Sometimes we do not understand the thinking of those in Washington. This is one of those times.

[+/-] read more...

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

New Copyright Brochure On-Line At USIP.COM


“Copyrights” is the latest informational brochure to be posted on the Sheldon Mak & Anderson website (www.usip.com).  Among the subjects covered are:


1.                  What Is A Copyright?
2.                  What Works Can Be Protected By Copyright?
3.                  What Does Copyright Not Protect?
4.                  Who Owns The Copyright?
5.                  How Long Does A Copyright Last?
6.                  What Are The Rights Of The Copyright Owner?
7.                  What Is Copyright Infringement?
8.                  How To Give Notice Of Copyright?
9.                  Should You Register Your Copyright?
10.              International Copyright Protection

This information can be found at:

[+/-] read more...

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Clarification: USPTO to Begin Accepting Requests for Prioritized Examination of Patent Applications on May 4, 2011

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced plans for the agency to begin accepting requests for prioritized examination of patent applications – allowing inventors and businesses to have their patents processed within 12 months. It currently takes nearly three years to process the average patent. The program, called Track One, launches May 4, 2011, and is part of a new Three-Track system, which will provide applicants with greater control over when their applications are examined and promote greater efficiency in the patent examination process.

“Track One provides a comprehensive, flexible patent application processing model to our nation’s innovators, offering different processing options that are more responsive to the real-world needs of our applicants,” said Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO David Kappos. “The Three-Track program will bring the most important new products and services to market more quickly, helping to build businesses and create new jobs in America.”

Requests for prioritized examination will initially be limited to a maximum of 10,000 applications starting May 4, 2011 through the remainder of fiscal year 2011, ending September 30. The USPTO will revisit this limit at the end of the fiscal year to evaluate whether adjustments are needed for future years.

Filing a request for prioritized examination through Track One will include a fee under 37 CFR 1.102(e) of $4,000, in addition to filing fees for the application. For smaller entities, the USPTO is working to offer a 50 percent discount on any filing fee associated with the program, as it does with many other standard processing fees. Under 37 C.F.R. 1.102(e), prioritization is available only for an original and complete utility or plant nonprovisional application that contains or is amended to contain no more than four independent claims, no more than 30 total claims, and no multiple dependent claims.  Thus far, it is not clear whether 37 C.F.R. 1.102(e) can be used for already pending applications 

Under the Three-Track program, patent applicants may request prioritized examination through Track One, traditional examination under the current procedures through Track Two, and for non-continuing applications first filed with the USPTO, an applicant-controlled delay for up to 30 months prior to docketing for examination under Track Three. Track Three is expected to be available to applicants by September 30, 2011.

The Federal Register notice announcing the implementation of Track One is now available for review here. For additional background on the Three-Track program which USPTO plans to launch before the end of the fiscal year, see the initial program announcement here

[+/-] read more...

Thursday, March 24, 2011

Another Big Win For Our Client!


We are happy to share the successful conclusion of a simmering trademark dispute for our client, a local garment manufacturer.  The matter ends in our client selling his mark for seven figures to a major European retailer interested in the relevant markets.

Our firm undertook the representation on a contingency basis, and that helped equalize the size difference of the parties.

If you have trademarks or other IP that are not generating revenues, perhaps it is time to look at disposing of them.


[+/-] read more...

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

U.S. Customs Making IP Protection at Border Even More Effective

U.S. Customs (Customs & Border Protection (CBP)) is authorized to record registered trademarks and copyrights to block unauthorized imports.  Over the years we have found this to be a very cost effective IP enforcement tool for our clients - you have a law enforcement agency of the U.S. government actively helping you monitor and enforce your IP rights at the U.S. borders.  Recordation is available for registered trademarks and copyrights only (and not available for patents).

Customs just announced a new function added to CBP's intranet.  If there are specific indicia that can help identify your goods, as distinguished from the likely infringing goods, you should definitely bring it to the attention to CBP through the submission of your PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION GUIDES.  The following email from CBP sets forth the rules, and please note some of the restrictions, such as:

  • IPR holders that address legal authorities or direct action may be barred from future port training.

You should get help as necessary in preparing the PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION GUIDES. 

We checked with CBP, and note the following additional points:

1.  CBP prefers that the PI Guides be submitted in .PDF format.  After the Guides are vetted by headquarters, that is what is going to be entered into the IPRiS intranet, and used by the various ITS (International Trade Specialists) at all of the ports of entry of the United States. 

2.  The recordation holder can amend and submit new PI Guides at any time, with the change in products and marketing materials. 

3.  However, the flip side is that the ITS is supposed to work ONLY with the PI Guides already placed in IPRiS (since this is a new system, it'd be interesting to see how Customs interprets that rule - e.g., whether that means no).

4.  I asked about the situation when the recordation holder does not file a PI Guide.  Customs will still continue to enforce the recorded IP, but the implication is that cases with PI Guides will probably be "easier" for CBP to work with.

5.  About this "port training", I am told that recordation holders could request meetings with the ITS at the port of interest (e.g., Long Beach), and go down and talk to the International Trade Specialist about how to IDENTIFY infringing products.  But care has to be taken so as NOT to argue legal authorities or push for direct action against specific infringers.

6.  CBP's  current policy is that allegations about infringement should be made with discretion.  They do not want to see "naked" allegations without proof.  They also have an electronic submission form for making allegations of IP infringement (of course for RECORDED copyrights and trademarks only), located at:


If you need help, call us.   The following is the original message from CBP.

From: BRABANT, GARY D [mailto:gary.brabant@dhs.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 10:55 AM
Subject: Product Identification Guides

This email is to thank you for recording your registered trademark(s) and/or copyright(s) with Customs & Border Protection (CBP).  Some rights owners have already taken advantage of a recently added function to CBP’s Intranet, and provided their Product Identification Guides to CBP for upload to our Intellectual Property Rights internal Search system (IPRiS).  Rights owners who have recorded their copyright(s) and/or trademark(s) with CBP but have not submitted their product identification guides should seriously consider doing so.  Submission of the product guide helps us with quicker response for authentication, and for protecting producers and consumers against the health and safety risks associated with fake commodities that work their way into supply chains.  The job of authenticating products and identifying counterfeit and pirated merchandise at US ports of entry is a difficult task, and these guides are another tool providing assistance to CBP Officers and Import Specialists in the fight against counterfeit and piratical goods.  

We would like to take this opportunity to invite you and your company to submit a Product Identification Guide so that CBP can maintain a secure central repository of information that CBP Officers and Import Specialists can use for product authentication throughout the U.S. and at ports of entry. When you create a Product Identification Guide, please see below for general guidelines and incorporation of a required disclaimer.  Once this process is completed, we will review your Guide for accuracy, and after approval, it will be posted to our secure intranet.

For any additional assistance or questions, please contact one of our International Trade Specialists, Mr. Gary Brabant, gary.d.brabant@dhs.gov , tel: 202-863-6603; or Mr. Marty Canner, martin.canner@dhs.gov , tel: 202-863-6612. 

IPR PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION GUIDES: GUIDELINES
The following guidelines are provided to clarify current CBP policy related to product identification training:

  • Product identification training materials from IPR holders should neither address CBP legal authority nor offer legal opinions concerning the course of action that CBP officers should take in any particular situation.
  • CBP need not have made an actual determination that a suspect product is “counterfeit” and “piratical” in order for IPR holders to use these terms in their training materials.  However, when developing their training materials, IPR holders are encouraged to use terms such as “suspect” or “allegedly infringing” rather than “counterfeit” or “piratical,” where possible.
  • IPR holders shall not instruct CBP officers and import specialists, either verbally or in writing, to examine, detain, or seize goods for IPR violations.
  • Field offices and/or ports may exercise discretion when considering any offer of training from IPR holders.  Impact on port operations, such as staffing issues, should always be considered.
  • Training is to be declined if an IPR holder has not recorded their rights with CBP.
  • IPR holders that address legal authorities or direct action may be barred from future port training.
  • A copy of the disclaimer statement (below) is required to be attached to each copy of the product identification training materials before the materials are disseminated to field personnel. 

DISCLAIMER

The opinions expressed herein are those of the right owner and do not necessarily reflect the position of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).  Decisions as to whether or not merchandise should be detained or seized for infringing protected intellectual property rights are to be made in accordance with established procedures by CBP personnel at the appropriate management level of the concerned field office.  CBP personnel who have questions arising from this product identification training material or manual should call the IPR Helpdesk at 562-980-3119, ext. 252, or the IPR and Restricted Merchandise Branch, Regulations and Rulings at (202) 325-0020.

[+/-] read more...

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

New Video Presentation -- "Protecting Ideas And Avoiding Infringement"

Sheldon  Mak & Anderson is proud to announce Jeffrey G. Sheldon's 6-Part online Video presentation titled:

"PROTECTING IDEAS AND AVOIDING INFRINGEMENT"

Mr. Sheldon offers valuable information on the following topics:

Part One:  Introduction to Protecting Ideas, Patents (I)
Part Two:  Patents (II)
Part Three:  Trade Secrets
Part Four:   Copyright Protection, Open Source Software
Part Five:  Trademarks
Part Six:  Contract Protection, Great Quotes Regarding Inventions

Now available for viewing on our website:

and YouTube

[+/-] read more...