I agree to Idea TMEP 708 - Priority Action I disagree to Idea TMEP 708 - Priority Action

Rank11

Idea#67

This idea is active.
Discuss the Format of the TMEP »

TMEP 708 - Priority Action

The benefit of "Priority Action" has not not been clearly given under TMEP 708.01. Responding to a priority action within 2 months will give priority handling of the response. But this is not explained anywhere under the TMEP.

Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp

Comment

Submitted by balalaw 1 year ago

Vote Activity

  1. Agreed
    5 months ago
  2. Agreed
    1 year ago

Events

  1. The idea was posted
    1 year ago

Comments (4)

  1. I agree. I have never understood the benefit of priority actions and treat them as any other Office Actions with six month response deadlines. To its credit, the Trademark Office is examining responses very quickly (almost too quickly) these days.

    1 year ago
  2. Moderator

    Thank you for your comments. In a "Priority Action," "PRIORITY" indicates a previous discussion between the examining attorney and applicant/counsel, and that there is some action that can be taken by the applicant/counsel to resolve the refusal or requirement in question and move the application forward in the process.

    1 year ago
  3. I agree that there should be a clear explanation of what a"Priority Action" means in a standard easy to consult reference source such as the TMEP.

    1 year ago
  4. As others have commented, this may be a moot point, given the very nice job Trademark Examining Attorneys are doing with their caseload. One large advantage of making a SOP of the 2-month rule is that it speeds up prosecution in those rare cases where the Examining Attorney needs shorter deadlines to advance prosecution.

    5 months ago