I agree to Idea Use by related party I disagree to Idea Use by related party


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

Use by related party

Section 1201.03(a) states (in its title and text) that use by a related party “must” be disclosed in an application. But the Section then proceeds to say that that use by a related party “should” be disclosed in an application under §§1(a) and (b). Is it mandatory or permissive? Either way, since TEAS forms reference use by a related party in the alternative, there may be no need to affirmatively disclose the fact. The TMEP should be revised to clarify any obligation and take into account the electronic forms.


Submitted by 2 years ago

Comments (2)

  1. I agree that the MPEP should conform to the forms,although maybe that's the cart leading the horse. Either way, I'm in favor of anything that ads clarity by removing ambiguity.

    1 year ago
  2. This comment has produced action. Rule 2.38 was amended in the recent "Misc. Changes to Trademark Rules of Practice" package (final rule published in Fed. Reg. on January 16, 2015) to remove the requirement that the applicant state whether use is by a related company. TMEP 1201.03(a) has been updated accordingly.

    9 months ago

Vote Activity Show


  1. The idea was posted
    2 years ago