Petition to Director Received

BIRDIE

ROSIEQ LLC

Petition to Director

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.
PTO Form 2301 (Rev 02/2020)
OMB No. 0651-0054 (Exp 12/31/2020)

Petition to Director


The table below presents the data as entered.

Input Field
Entered
SERIAL NUMBER 86970282
LAW OFFICE ASSIGNED LAW OFFICE 112
PETITION
PETITION STATEMENT Request acceptance of SOU where the use in commerce date was after the expiration of the 36-month statutory deadline as a result of COVID-19 outbreak.
MARK SECTION
MARK mark
LITERAL ELEMENT BIRDIE
STANDARD CHARACTERS YES
USPTO-GENERATED IMAGE YES
MARK STATEMENT The mark consists of standard characters, without claim to any particular font style, size or color.
OWNER SECTION (current)
NAME ROSIEQ LLC
MAILING ADDRESS 90 STATE STREET STE 700
CITY ALBANY
STATE New York
ZIP/POSTAL CODE 12207
COUNTRY/REGION/JURISDICTION/U.S. TERRITORY United States
EMAIL XXXX
OWNER SECTION (proposed)
NAME ROSIEQ LLC
MAILING ADDRESS 90 STATE STREET STE 700
CITY ALBANY
STATE New York
ZIP/POSTAL CODE 12207
COUNTRY/REGION/JURISDICTION/U.S. TERRITORY United States
EMAIL XXXX
EXPLANATION OF FILING
Pursuant to 37 CFR § 2.146., Petitioner Birdie Inc. submits this petition on behalf of the application submitted under Serial #86970282 (“Application”) to respectfully request that the USPTO Director accept the included Statement of Use (“SOU”) (attached as Exhibit A) and register the Petitioner's Application for the reasons set forth herein.
Statement of Facts
The Notice of Allowance for the Application issued on May 16, 2017, resulting in a 36-month statutory due date of May 18, 2020 (as May 16, 2020 fell on a Saturday, the due date moved to Monday May 18 pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §2.196),
Petitioner operates a mobile application and website that allows users to share reviews and information about various types of products and services. Petitioner is owned and operated by a single member, Lauren Rosenthal Turon, who has spent years developing the mobile application and website. After investing significant time and resources, Petitioner’s mobile application and website both neared completion and were on track for commercial release in the spring of 2020. However, the unexpected and extraordinary occurrence of COVID-19 outbreak delayed Petitioner and its software developers' completion of the mobile application. Ultimately, Petitioner's mobile application was released to the Android app store on May 22, 2020. Petitioner filed the corresponding SOU on May 31, 2020 (a true and correct copy is attached as Exhibit A).
On July 1, 2020, Examining Attorney Hay Li Lam issued Office Action because the May 22, 2020 use in commerce date was after the 36-month statutory deadline. Petitioner's counsel communicated with the Examining Attorney by telephone regarding the Office Action, who confirmed that Petitioner's only recourse was to submit a petition to the Director.
Legal Argument:
As a response to the devastating effects of the COVID-19 outbreak, the CARES Act granted the USPTO the ability to “toll, waive, adjust, or modify any timing deadline established by the Trademark Act, or regulations promulgated thereunder, in effect during the emergency period described in subsection 12004(e) of the CARES Act, if the Director of the USPTO determines that the emergency related to such period: (1) materially affects the functioning of the Office; (2) prejudices the rights of applicants, registrants, patent and trademark owners, or others appearing before the Office; or (3) prevents applicants, registrants, patent and trademark owners, or others appearing before the Office from filing a document or fee with the Office.” See USPTO’s Notice of Extended Waiver of Trademark-Related Timing Deadlines under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act and Other Relief Available to Trademark Applicants and Trademark Owners (“Notice”) dated March 31, 2020 available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/sites/default/files/documents/TM-Notice-CARES-Act.pdf, and updated Notice dated April 28, 2020 available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/sites/default/files/documents/TM-Notice-CARES-Act-2020-04.pdf. Pursuant to the CARES Act, the USPTO issued notices and FAQs that set forth relief for applicants “unable to meet trademark-related timing deadlines due to the COVID-19 outbreak.” Id.
Under the USPTO’s April 28, 2020 Notice and accompanying FAQ updated on May 4, 2020 (available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademark/laws-regulations/cares-act-faqs-may), filings due between March 27, 2020 and May 31, 2020, including any “statement of use or request for extension of time to file a statement of use under 15 U.S.C. § 1051(d) and 37 C.F.R. §§ 2.88(a) and 2.89(a)” would be considered timely if filed on or before June 1, 2020, provided that it was accompanied by a statement that the delay in filing or payment was due to the COVID-19 outbreak. In the USTPO’s March 31, 2020 and April 28 Notices and accompanying FAQs, no distinction was made between the filing deadlines on delayed SOUs that were receiving extensions and the 36-month statutory deadline for an SOU. Additionally, there was no language in any of this guidance indicating that the use date and filing date would be treated differently and that a late filing that would be excused under the CARES Act still needed to comply with the original use in commerce deadline.
The final Notice from the USPTO regarding COVID-19 extensions, issued on May 27, 2020 (available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/sites/default/files/documents/TM-Notice-CARES-Act-2020-05.pdf) suggested that there may be a distinction, and applications reaching their 36-month statutory deadline may not be eligible for an automatic extension through May 31, 2020, which stated that “Applicants who missed the 36-month statutory deadline for filing a Statement of Use, and therefore their application has been abandoned, should use the TEAS ‘Petition to the Director’ form. See 37 CFR § 2.146.” This Notice was issued after the Petitioner's 36-month statutory deadline and only four (4) days before the extensions were scheduled to end. Petitioner had no way of knowing between April 28 and May 27 that it would need to ensure a use in commerce occurred before May 18 instead of May 31.
It is worth noting that as the USPTO has issued this guidance in the May 27 Notice (and the related Question 13 in the FAQ, updated on June 9, 2020 and available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademark/laws-regulations/cares-act-faqs), the agency recognizes that an applicant who misses the 36-month deadline for filing the SOU because of COVID-19 should still be entitled to registration. To not allow for such registrations while allowing for late COVID-19 related registrations and/or additional extensions for other 1(b) applications would be cruel and unfair for applicants that reached their 36-month deadline during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Conclusion:
Over the last four years, Petitioner has spent significant time and capital developing its products and protecting the trademarks that it intended to use in connection with its offerings. Petitioner was working hard in early 2020 to meet the Application’s 36-month statutory deadline. Petitioner’s 4-day gap between the 36-month statutory deadline for using the trademark “Birdie” on the Petitioner’s mobile application and the actual first use in commerce date is completely attributable to the virus. When the COVID-19 outbreak began and materially impacted Petitioner’s ability to reach its intended release date, it had a good faith belief that, based on the USPTO’s March 31, 2020 and April 28, 2020 Notices and FAQs, an SOU which had a deadline between March 27, 2020 and May 31, 2020 that was submitted and alleged a use in commerce date after the original deadline but before June 1, 2020, would be accepted as timely. It was only after the use in commerce date of May 22 that Petitioner received notice that it may still be subject to the May 18 deadline, rendering it impossible to avoid being late. However, as suggested by the May 27, 2020 Notice and Question 13 in the accompanying FAQ and by referencing the petition to the Director protocol, the USPTO seems to realize the inequity and prejudice that would result from not providing a mechanism for registration for parties in a situation similar to Petitioner’s.
As the July 1, 2020 Office Action effectively renders the Application abandoned, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Director of the USPTO reinstate the Application, accept the attached SOU and register the Petitioner’s trademark.
EVIDENCE SECTION
        EVIDENCE FILE NAME(S)
       ORIGINAL PDF FILE evi_17356221116-101501449 _._EXHIBIT_A_-_86970282_S OU_from_5.31.20.pdf
       CONVERTED PDF FILE(S)
       (11 pages)
\\TICRS\EXPORT18\IMAGEOUT 18\869\702\86970282\xml6\ PDR0002.JPG
        \\TICRS\EXPORT18\IMAGEOUT 18\869\702\86970282\xml6\ PDR0003.JPG
        \\TICRS\EXPORT18\IMAGEOUT 18\869\702\86970282\xml6\ PDR0004.JPG
        \\TICRS\EXPORT18\IMAGEOUT 18\869\702\86970282\xml6\ PDR0005.JPG
        \\TICRS\EXPORT18\IMAGEOUT 18\869\702\86970282\xml6\ PDR0006.JPG
        \\TICRS\EXPORT18\IMAGEOUT 18\869\702\86970282\xml6\ PDR0007.JPG
        \\TICRS\EXPORT18\IMAGEOUT 18\869\702\86970282\xml6\ PDR0008.JPG
        \\TICRS\EXPORT18\IMAGEOUT 18\869\702\86970282\xml6\ PDR0009.JPG
        \\TICRS\EXPORT18\IMAGEOUT 18\869\702\86970282\xml6\ PDR0010.JPG
        \\TICRS\EXPORT18\IMAGEOUT 18\869\702\86970282\xml6\ PDR0011.JPG
        \\TICRS\EXPORT18\IMAGEOUT 18\869\702\86970282\xml6\ PDR0012.JPG
CORRESPONDENCE INFORMATION (current)
NAME Philip Z Kimball
PRIMARY EMAIL ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Trademarks@pzklaw.com
SECONDARY EMAIL ADDRESS(ES) (COURTESY COPIES) pzkimball@pzklaw.com
CORRESPONDENCE INFORMATION (proposed)
NAME Philip Z Kimball
PRIMARY EMAIL ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Trademarks@pzklaw.com
SECONDARY EMAIL ADDRESS(ES) (COURTESY COPIES) pzkimball@pzklaw.com
PAYMENT SECTION
PETITION FEE PER PETITION 100
NUMBER OF CLASSES 1
TOTAL FEES DUE 100
SIGNATURE SECTION
DECLARATION SIGNATURE /Philip Z Kimball/
SIGNATORY'S NAME Philip Z Kimball
SIGNATORY'S POSITION Atorney of record, New York bar member
SIGNATORY'S PHONE NUMBER 646-801-8363
DATE SIGNED 08/31/2020
PETITION SIGNATURE /Philip Z Kimball/
SIGNATORY'S NAME Philip Z Kimball
SIGNATORY'S POSITION Attorney of record, New York bar member
SIGNATORY'S PHONE NUMBER 646-801-8363
DATE SIGNED 08/31/2020
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY YES
FILING INFORMATION SECTION
SUBMIT DATE Mon Aug 31 10:31:40 ET 2020
TEAS STAMP USPTO/PGP-XXX.XX.XXX.XXX-
20200831103140423313-8697
0282-750133e76a3641c31bbc
61df5949c16c7fd0b62a6c56a
96de09ba3511e5df4a5ff-CC-
31396642-2020083110150144
9076



Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.
PTO Form 2301 (Rev 02/2020)
OMB No. 0651-0054 (Exp 12/31/2020)

Petition to Director


To the Commissioner for Trademarks:

Application serial no. 86970282 BIRDIE(Standard Characters, see http://uspto.report/TM/86970282/mark.png) has been amended as follows: PETITION
Petition Statement
Request acceptance of SOU where the use in commerce date was after the expiration of the 36-month statutory deadline as a result of COVID-19 outbreak.

EXPLANATION OF FILING
Pursuant to 37 CFR § 2.146., Petitioner Birdie Inc. submits this petition on behalf of the application submitted under Serial #86970282 (“Application”) to respectfully request that the USPTO Director accept the included Statement of Use (“SOU”) (attached as Exhibit A) and register the Petitioner's Application for the reasons set forth herein.
Statement of Facts
The Notice of Allowance for the Application issued on May 16, 2017, resulting in a 36-month statutory due date of May 18, 2020 (as May 16, 2020 fell on a Saturday, the due date moved to Monday May 18 pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §2.196),
Petitioner operates a mobile application and website that allows users to share reviews and information about various types of products and services. Petitioner is owned and operated by a single member, Lauren Rosenthal Turon, who has spent years developing the mobile application and website. After investing significant time and resources, Petitioner’s mobile application and website both neared completion and were on track for commercial release in the spring of 2020. However, the unexpected and extraordinary occurrence of COVID-19 outbreak delayed Petitioner and its software developers' completion of the mobile application. Ultimately, Petitioner's mobile application was released to the Android app store on May 22, 2020. Petitioner filed the corresponding SOU on May 31, 2020 (a true and correct copy is attached as Exhibit A).
On July 1, 2020, Examining Attorney Hay Li Lam issued Office Action because the May 22, 2020 use in commerce date was after the 36-month statutory deadline. Petitioner's counsel communicated with the Examining Attorney by telephone regarding the Office Action, who confirmed that Petitioner's only recourse was to submit a petition to the Director.
Legal Argument:
As a response to the devastating effects of the COVID-19 outbreak, the CARES Act granted the USPTO the ability to “toll, waive, adjust, or modify any timing deadline established by the Trademark Act, or regulations promulgated thereunder, in effect during the emergency period described in subsection 12004(e) of the CARES Act, if the Director of the USPTO determines that the emergency related to such period: (1) materially affects the functioning of the Office; (2) prejudices the rights of applicants, registrants, patent and trademark owners, or others appearing before the Office; or (3) prevents applicants, registrants, patent and trademark owners, or others appearing before the Office from filing a document or fee with the Office.” See USPTO’s Notice of Extended Waiver of Trademark-Related Timing Deadlines under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act and Other Relief Available to Trademark Applicants and Trademark Owners (“Notice”) dated March 31, 2020 available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/sites/default/files/documents/TM-Notice-CARES-Act.pdf, and updated Notice dated April 28, 2020 available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/sites/default/files/documents/TM-Notice-CARES-Act-2020-04.pdf. Pursuant to the CARES Act, the USPTO issued notices and FAQs that set forth relief for applicants “unable to meet trademark-related timing deadlines due to the COVID-19 outbreak.” Id.
Under the USPTO’s April 28, 2020 Notice and accompanying FAQ updated on May 4, 2020 (available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademark/laws-regulations/cares-act-faqs-may), filings due between March 27, 2020 and May 31, 2020, including any “statement of use or request for extension of time to file a statement of use under 15 U.S.C. § 1051(d) and 37 C.F.R. §§ 2.88(a) and 2.89(a)” would be considered timely if filed on or before June 1, 2020, provided that it was accompanied by a statement that the delay in filing or payment was due to the COVID-19 outbreak. In the USTPO’s March 31, 2020 and April 28 Notices and accompanying FAQs, no distinction was made between the filing deadlines on delayed SOUs that were receiving extensions and the 36-month statutory deadline for an SOU. Additionally, there was no language in any of this guidance indicating that the use date and filing date would be treated differently and that a late filing that would be excused under the CARES Act still needed to comply with the original use in commerce deadline.
The final Notice from the USPTO regarding COVID-19 extensions, issued on May 27, 2020 (available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/sites/default/files/documents/TM-Notice-CARES-Act-2020-05.pdf) suggested that there may be a distinction, and applications reaching their 36-month statutory deadline may not be eligible for an automatic extension through May 31, 2020, which stated that “Applicants who missed the 36-month statutory deadline for filing a Statement of Use, and therefore their application has been abandoned, should use the TEAS ‘Petition to the Director’ form. See 37 CFR § 2.146.” This Notice was issued after the Petitioner's 36-month statutory deadline and only four (4) days before the extensions were scheduled to end. Petitioner had no way of knowing between April 28 and May 27 that it would need to ensure a use in commerce occurred before May 18 instead of May 31.
It is worth noting that as the USPTO has issued this guidance in the May 27 Notice (and the related Question 13 in the FAQ, updated on June 9, 2020 and available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademark/laws-regulations/cares-act-faqs), the agency recognizes that an applicant who misses the 36-month deadline for filing the SOU because of COVID-19 should still be entitled to registration. To not allow for such registrations while allowing for late COVID-19 related registrations and/or additional extensions for other 1(b) applications would be cruel and unfair for applicants that reached their 36-month deadline during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Conclusion:
Over the last four years, Petitioner has spent significant time and capital developing its products and protecting the trademarks that it intended to use in connection with its offerings. Petitioner was working hard in early 2020 to meet the Application’s 36-month statutory deadline. Petitioner’s 4-day gap between the 36-month statutory deadline for using the trademark “Birdie” on the Petitioner’s mobile application and the actual first use in commerce date is completely attributable to the virus. When the COVID-19 outbreak began and materially impacted Petitioner’s ability to reach its intended release date, it had a good faith belief that, based on the USPTO’s March 31, 2020 and April 28, 2020 Notices and FAQs, an SOU which had a deadline between March 27, 2020 and May 31, 2020 that was submitted and alleged a use in commerce date after the original deadline but before June 1, 2020, would be accepted as timely. It was only after the use in commerce date of May 22 that Petitioner received notice that it may still be subject to the May 18 deadline, rendering it impossible to avoid being late. However, as suggested by the May 27, 2020 Notice and Question 13 in the accompanying FAQ and by referencing the petition to the Director protocol, the USPTO seems to realize the inequity and prejudice that would result from not providing a mechanism for registration for parties in a situation similar to Petitioner’s.
As the July 1, 2020 Office Action effectively renders the Application abandoned, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Director of the USPTO reinstate the Application, accept the attached SOU and register the Petitioner’s trademark.


EVIDENCE

Original PDF file:
evi_17356221116-101501449 _._EXHIBIT_A_-_86970282_S OU_from_5.31.20.pdf
Converted PDF file(s) ( 11 pages) Evidence-1Evidence-2Evidence-3Evidence-4Evidence-5Evidence-6Evidence-7Evidence-8Evidence-9Evidence-10Evidence-11

OWNER AND/OR ENTITY INFORMATION
The owner proposes to amend the following:
Current: ROSIEQ LLC, a limited liability company legally organized under the laws of New York, having an address of
      90 STATE STREET STE 700
      ALBANY, New York 12207
      United States
      Email Address: XXXX

Proposed: ROSIEQ LLC, a limited liability company legally organized under the laws of New York, having an address of
      90 STATE STREET STE 700
      ALBANY, New York 12207
      United States
      Email Address: XXXX
Correspondence Information (current):
      Philip Z Kimball
      PRIMARY EMAIL FOR CORRESPONDENCE: Trademarks@pzklaw.com
      SECONDARY EMAIL ADDRESS(ES) (COURTESY COPIES): pzkimball@pzklaw.com
Correspondence Information (proposed):
      Philip Z Kimball
      PRIMARY EMAIL FOR CORRESPONDENCE: Trademarks@pzklaw.com
      SECONDARY EMAIL ADDRESS(ES) (COURTESY COPIES): pzkimball@pzklaw.com

Requirement for Email and Electronic Filing: I understand that a valid email address must be maintained by the owner/holder and the owner's/holder's attorney, if appointed, and that all official trademark correspondence must be submitted via the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS).

FEE(S)
Fee(s) in the amount of $100 is being submitted.

SIGNATURE(S)
Declaration Signature

DECLARATION: The signatory being warned that willful false statements and the like are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and that such willful false statements and the like may jeopardize the validity of the application or submission or any registration resulting therefrom, declares that, if the applicant submitted the application or allegation of use (AOU) unsigned, all statements in the application or AOU and this submission based on the signatory's own knowledge are true, and all statements in the application or AOU and this submission made on information and belief are believed to be true.

STATEMENTS FOR UNSIGNED SECTION 1(a) APPLICATION/AOU: If the applicant filed an unsigned application under 15 U.S.C. §1051(a) or AOU under 15 U.S.C. §1051(c), the signatory additionally believes that: the applicant is the owner of the mark sought to be registered; the mark is in use in commerce and was in use in commerce as of the filing date of the application or AOU on or in connection with the goods/services/collective membership organization in the application or AOU; the original specimen(s), if applicable, shows the mark in use in commerce as of the filing date of the application or AOU on or in connection with the goods/services/collective membership organization in the application or AOU; for a collective trademark, collective service mark, collective membership mark application, or certification mark application, the applicant is exercising legitimate control over the use of the mark in commerce and was exercising legitimate control over the use of the mark in commerce as of the filing date of the application or AOU; for a certification mark application, the applicant is not engaged in the production or marketing of the goods/services to which the mark is applied, except to advertise or promote recognition of the certification program or of the goods/services that meet the certification standards of the applicant. To the best of the signatory's knowledge and belief, no other persons, except, if applicable, authorized users, members, and/or concurrent users, have the right to use the mark in commerce, either in the identical form or in such near resemblance as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods/services/collective membership organization of such other persons, to cause confusion or mistake, or to deceive.

STATEMENTS FOR UNSIGNED SECTION 1(b)/SECTION 44 APPLICATION AND FOR SECTION 66(a) COLLECTIVE/CERTIFICATION MARK APPLICATION: If the applicant filed an unsigned application under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051(b), 1126(d), and/or 1126(e), or filed a collective/certification mark application under 15 U.S.C. §1141f(a), the signatory additionally believes that: for a trademark or service mark application, the applicant is entitled to use the mark in commerce on or in connection with the goods/services specified in the application; the applicant has a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce and had a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce as of the application filing date; for a collective trademark, collective service mark, collective membership mark, or certification mark application, the applicant has a bona fide intention, and is entitled, to exercise legitimate control over the use of the mark in commerce and had a bona fide intention, and was entitled, to exercise legitimate control over the use of the mark in commerce as of the application filing date; the signatory is properly authorized to execute the declaration on behalf of the applicant; for a certification mark application, the applicant will not engage in the production or marketing of the goods/services to which the mark is applied, except to advertise or promote recognition of the certification program or of the goods/services that meet the certification standards of the applicant. To the best of the signatory's knowledge and belief, no other persons, except, if applicable, authorized users, members, and/or concurrent users, have the right to use the mark in commerce, either in the identical form or in such near resemblance as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods/services/collective membership organization of such other persons, to cause confusion or mistake, or to deceive.



Signature: /Philip Z Kimball/      Date: 08/31/2020
Signatory's Name: Philip Z Kimball
Signatory's Position: Atorney of record, New York bar member
Signatory's Phone Number: 646-801-8363



Signature: /Philip Z Kimball/     Date: 08/31/2020
Signatory's Name: Philip Z Kimball
Signatory's Position: Attorney of record, New York bar member

Signatory's Phone Number: 646-801-8363

The signatory has confirmed that he/she is a U.S.-licensed attorney who is an active member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of a U.S. state (including the District of Columbia and any U.S. Commonwealth or territory); and he/she is currently the petitioner's attorney or an associate thereof; and to the best of his/her knowledge, if prior to his/her appointment another U.S.-licensed attorney not currently associated with his/her company/firm previously represented the petitioner in this matter: the petitioner has revoked their power of attorney by a signed revocation or substitute power of attorney with the USPTO; the USPTO has granted that attorney's withdrawal; the petitioner has filed a power of attorney appointing him/her in this matter; or the petitioner's appointed U.S.-licensed attorney has filed a power of attorney appointing him/her as an associate attorney in this matter.

Mailing Address:    Philip Z Kimball
   Philip Z Kimball PLLC
   
   101 Clinton Street, Suite 4E
   Brooklyn, New York 11201
Mailing Address:    Philip Z Kimball
   Philip Z Kimball PLLC
   101 Clinton Street, Suite 4E
   Brooklyn, New York 11201
        
RAM Sale Number: 86970282
RAM Accounting Date: 08/31/2020
        
Serial Number: 86970282
Internet Transmission Date: Mon Aug 31 10:31:40 ET 2020
TEAS Stamp: USPTO/PGP-XXX.XX.XXX.XXX-202008311031404
23313-86970282-750133e76a3641c31bbc61df5
949c16c7fd0b62a6c56a96de09ba3511e5df4a5f
f-CC-31396642-20200831101501449076


Petition to Director Received [image/jpeg]

Petition to Director Received [image/jpeg]

Petition to Director Received [image/jpeg]

Petition to Director Received [image/jpeg]

Petition to Director Received [image/jpeg]

Petition to Director Received [image/jpeg]

Petition to Director Received [image/jpeg]

Petition to Director Received [image/jpeg]

Petition to Director Received [image/jpeg]

Petition to Director Received [image/jpeg]

Petition to Director Received [image/jpeg]


uspto.report is an independent third-party trademark research tool that is not affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or any other governmental organization. The information provided by uspto.report is based on publicly available data at the time of writing and is intended for informational purposes only.

While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information displayed on this site. The use of this site is at your own risk. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

All official trademark data, including owner information, should be verified by visiting the official USPTO website at www.uspto.gov. This site is not intended to replace professional legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for consulting with a legal professional who is knowledgeable about trademark law.

© 2024 USPTO.report | Privacy Policy | Resources | RSS Feed of Trademarks | Trademark Filings Twitter Feed