Madrid Protocol, 6056-6058 [E6-1560]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
6056
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 24 / Monday, February 6, 2006 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
Madrid Protocol
ACTION:
Proposed collection; comment
request.
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork
and respondent burden, invites the
general public and other Federal
agencies to take this opportunity to
comment on the revision of a continuing
information collection, as required by
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)).
Written comments must be
submitted on or before April 7, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
• E-mail: Susan.Brown@uspto.gov.
Include ‘‘0651–0051 comment’’ in the
subject line of the message.
• Fax: 571–273–0112, marked to the
attention of Susan Brown.
• Mail: Susan K. Brown, Records
Officer, Office of the Chief Information
Officer, Architecture, Engineering and
Technical Services, Data Architecture
and Services Division, U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450,
Alexandria, VA 22313–1450.
• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information
should be directed to Sharon Marsh,
Deputy Commissioner for Trademark
Examination Policy, Office of the
Commissioner for Trademarks, U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box
1451, Alexandria, VA 22313–1451; by
telephone at 571–272–7140; or by e-mail
at Sharon.Marsh@uspto.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
I. Abstract
This collection of information is
required by the Trademark Act of 1946,
15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq., which provides
for the Federal registration of
trademarks, service marks, collective
trademarks and service marks, collective
membership marks, and certification
marks. Individuals and businesses that
use or intend to use such marks in
commerce may file an application to
register the marks with the United
States Patent and Trademark Office
(USPTO).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:55 Feb 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
The Protocol Relating to the Madrid
Agreement Concerning the International
Registration of Marks (‘‘Madrid
Protocol’’) is an international treaty that
allows a trademark owner to seek
registration in any of the participating
countries by filing a single international
application. The International Bureau
(‘‘IB’’) of the World Intellectual Property
Organization (‘‘WIPO’’) in Geneva,
Switzerland, administers the
international registration system. The
Madrid Protocol Implementation Act of
2002 amended the Trademark Act to
provide that: (1) The owner of a U.S.
application or registration may seek
protection of its mark in any of the
participating countries by submitting a
single international application to the IB
through the USPTO, and (2) the holder
of an international registration may
request an extension of protection of the
international registration to the United
States. The Madrid Protocol became
effective in the United States on
November 2, 2003, and is implemented
under 37 CFR part 2 and part 7. An
international application submitted
through the USPTO must be based on an
active U.S. application or registration
and must be filed by the owner of the
application or registration. The USPTO
reviews the international application to
certify that it corresponds to the existing
U.S. application or registration before
forwarding the international application
to the IB. The IB then reviews the
international application and sends a
notice of irregularity to the USPTO and
the applicant if the application does not
meet the filing requirements of the
Madrid Protocol. After any irregularities
are corrected, the IB will then register
the mark and notify each country
designated in the application of the
request for extension of protection. The
holder of the international registration
may also request an extension of
protection to additional countries by
filing a subsequent designation.
Under section 71 of the Trademark
Act, a registered extension of protection
to the United States will be cancelled
unless the holder of the international
registration periodically files affidavits
of use in commerce or excusable
nonuse. Since these affidavits cannot be
filed until five years after the USPTO
registers an extension of protection, the
USPTO will not accept these affidavits
until after November 2, 2008, and their
estimated burden will not be included
in this collection at this time.
This collection includes the
information necessary for the USPTO to
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
process applications for international
registration and related requests under
the Madrid Protocol. The USPTO
provides electronic forms for filing the
Application for International
Registration, Subsequent Designation,
and Response to a Notice of Irregularity
through the Trademark Electronic
Application System (TEAS), which is
accessible via the USPTO Web site. An
electronic form for the Request for
Transformation is under development.
Applicants may also submit the items in
this collection on paper or by using the
forms provided by the IB, which are
available on the WIPO Web site. The IB
requires Applications for International
Registration and Subsequent
Designations that are filed on paper to
be submitted on the official IB forms.
The USPTO is adding one petition to
this collection, the Petition to Review
Refusal to Certify an International
Application.
II. Method of Collection
By mail, hand delivery, or
electronically to the USPTO.
III. Data
OMB Number: 0651–0051.
Form Number(s): PTO–2131, PTO–
2132, PTO–2133.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Affected Public: Individuals or
households; businesses or other forprofits; not-for-profit institutions; farms;
the Federal Government; and state, local
or tribal governments.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
4,312 responses per year.
Estimated Time Per Response: The
USPTO estimates that it will take the
public approximately two minutes to
one hour (0.03 to 1.0 hours) to complete
the information in this collection,
including the time to gather the
necessary information, prepare the
documents, and submit the completed
request to the USPTO.
Estimated Total Annual Respondent
Burden Hours: 1,012 hours per year.
Estimated Total Annual Respondent
Cost Burden: $289,432 per year. The
USPTO expects that the information in
this collection will be prepared by
attorneys. Using the professional rate of
$286 per hour for associate attorneys in
private firms, the USPTO estimates that
the respondent cost burden for
submitting the information in this
collection will be approximately
$289,432 per year.
E:\FR\FM\06FEN1.SGM
06FEN1
6057
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 24 / Monday, February 6, 2006 / Notices
Estimated time
for response
(minutes)
Item
Application for International Registration (PTO–2131) ................................................................
Subsequent Designation (PTO–2132) .........................................................................................
Response to Notice of Irregularities Issued by the IB in Connection with International Applications (PTO–2133) .....................................................................................................................
Request that the USPTO Replace a U.S. Registration with a Subsequently Registered Extension of Protection to the United States ....................................................................................
Request to Record an Assignment or Restriction of a Holder’s Right to Dispose of an International Registration ................................................................................................................
Request that the USPTO Transform a Cancelled Extension of Protection into an Application
for Registration under section 1 or 44 of the Act ....................................................................
Petition to Review Refusal to Certify an International Application ..............................................
Affidavit of Continued Use or Excusable Nonuse under section 71 of the Act ..........................
3,600
135
900
7
10
540
92
2
7
1
5
10
1
5
60
14
10
10
(1)
1
10
0
4,312
1,012
until November 2008.
Estimated Total Annual Non-hour
Respondent Cost Burden: $470,031.
There are no capital start-up,
maintenance, or recordkeeping costs
associated with this information
collection. However, this collection
does have annual (non-hour) costs in
the form of filing costs and postage
costs.
The USPTO charges fees for
processing international applications
and related requests under the Madrid
Protocol as set forth in 37 CFR 7.6. In
addition to these USPTO fees,
applicants must also pay international
filing fees to the IB as indicated in 37
CFR 7.7. The USPTO estimates that the
total filing costs in the form of USPTO
processing fees associated with this
collection will be approximately
$469,950 per year as calculated in the
accompanying table.
Estimated
annual
responses
Item
Application for International Registration, for certifying an international application based on a
single basic application or registration (per international class) ..............................................
Application for International Registration, for certifying an international application based on
more than one basic application or registration (per international class) ...............................
Subsequent Designation ..............................................................................................................
Response to Notice of Irregularities Issued by the IB in Connection with International Applications ..........................................................................................................................................
Request that the USPTO Replace a U.S. Registration with a Subsequently Registered Extension of Protection to the United States (per international class) .............................................
Request to Record an Assignment or Restriction of a Holder’s Right to Dispose of an International Registration ................................................................................................................
Request that the USPTO Transform a Cancelled Extension of Protection into an Application
for Registration under section 1 or 44 of the Act ....................................................................
Petition to Review Refusal to Certify an International Application ..............................................
Affidavit of Continued Use or Excusable Nonuse under section 71 of the Act (per international class) ..........................................................................................................................
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
Estimated
annual
filing costs
Fee amount
1,800
$100
$180,000
1,800
135
150
100
270,000
13,500
540
0
0
7
100
700
10
100
1,000
10
10
375
100
3,750
1,000
(1)
100
0
4,312
Total ......................................................................................................................................
1 None
Estimated
annual
burden hours
15
3
Total ......................................................................................................................................
1 None
Estimated
annual
responses
........................
469,950
until November 2008.
The public may submit the items in
this collection to the USPTO by mail
through the United States Postal
Service. The USPTO estimates that
approximately 208 of the 4,312
responses per year will be submitted by
mail and that the average first-class
postage cost for a mailed submission
will be 39 cents, for a total postage cost
of approximately $81 per year.
The total non-hour respondent cost
burden for this collection in the form of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:05 Feb 03, 2006
Jkt 205001
filing costs and postage costs is
estimated to be $470,031 per year.
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, e.g., the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized or
included in the request for OMB
approval of this information collection;
they also will become a matter of public
record.
E:\FR\FM\06FEN1.SGM
06FEN1
6058
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 24 / Monday, February 6, 2006 / Notices
Dated: January 31, 2006.
Susan K. Brown,
Records Officer, USPTO, Office of the Chief
Information Officer, Architecture,
Engineering and Technical Services, Data
Architecture and Services Division.
[FR Doc. E6–1560 Filed 2–3–06; 8:45 am]
and Title 5, U.S.C., appendix 1,
subsection 10(d). Open sessions of the
meeting will be limited by space
accommodations. Any interested person
may attend, appear before or file
statements with the committee at the
time and in the manner permitted by the
committee.
BILLING CODE 3510–16–P
Brenda. S. Bowen,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 06–1053 Filed 2–3–06; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army
BILLING CODE 3710–08–M
Armed Forces Epidemiological Board;
Meeting
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army, DoD.
Notice of partially-closed
meeting.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
In accordance with section
10(1)(2) of Public Law 92–463. The
Federal Advisory Committee Act,
announcement is made of the following
meeting:
Name of Committee: Armed Forces
Epidemiological Board (AFEB).
Dates: March 7, 2006 (Closed
meeting). March 8, 2006 (Open
meeting).
Times: 8 a.m.–5 p.m. (March 7, 2006).
7:30 a.m.–2 p.m. (March 8, 2006).
Location: U.S. Army Medical
Research and Material Command
Headquarters Building. Bldg. 810, Room
B18, Fort Detrick, MD (March 7, 2006)
and U.S. Army Medical Research
Institute of Infectious Diseases, 1425
Porter Street, Fort Detrick, MD 21702–
5011.
Agenda: The purpose of the meeting
is to address pending and new board
issues, provide briefings for Board
members on topics related to ongoing
and new Board issues, conduct
subcommittee meetings, and conduct an
executive working session.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Colonel Roger Gibson, Executive
Secretary, Armed Forces
Epidemiological Board, Skyline Six,
5109 Leesburg Pike, Room 682, Falls
Church, VA 220414–3258, (703) 681–
8012/3.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
interest of national security, and in
accordance with Title 5, United States
Code (U.S.C.) Appendix 2, Section 10(d)
and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1), March 7, 2006
may be closed to the public. In addition,
any classified portions of the meeting
minutes may be withheld from public
disclosure in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
Appendix 2, Section 10(b) and 5 U.S.C.
552(b)(1). The session on March 8, 2006
will be open to the public in accordance
with Section 552b(c) of Title 5, U.S.C.,
specifically subparagraph (1) thereof
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:55 Feb 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
Department of the Army; Corps of
Engineers
Intent To Prepare a Programmatic Draft
Environmental Impact Statement/
Environmental Impact Report for the
Los Angeles River Ecosystem
Restoration Study, Los Angeles, CA
Department of the Army, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The study area is located
within the Los Angeles Basin on a broad
alluvial plain flanked by the Santa
Monica Mountains, to the west, and by
the San Gabriel Mountains to the
northeast. The Los Angeles River flows
from the headwaters of Bell Creek and
Calabasas Creek in the San Fernando
Valley community of Canoga Park
southeast through the San Fernando
Valley some 35 miles to downtown Los
Angeles. From there it continues in a
southerly direction until it empties into
the Pacific Ocean at Long Beach. The
specific study area comprises the 32
miles of the River within the City of Los
Angeles that extends from Owensmouth
Avenue, in the upper reaches of
northwest San Fernando Valley, to the
border of the City of Vernon, at the
southern end of Downtown Los Angeles.
The study proposes to consider a range
of activities to restore riparian and
aquatic habitat, and related habitat
functions, in and adjacent to the Los
Angeles River. Compatible activities to
conserve cultural resources, and to
provide recreational and interpretive
amenities, will also be considered.
Purpose: The purpose of this study is
to identify a range of opportunities to
improve the general environment of the
Los Angeles River through ecosystem
restoration and related measures. The
study area includes several locations
where potential exists for restoring a
more natural riverine environment
along the Los Angeles River, while
maintaining and improving levels of
flood protection. Creation of treatment
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
wetlands in and around the river, to
treat effluent river flows and to restore
missing linkages of fragmented habitat,
would also be pursued. Restored areas
would provide natural riparian habitat
to support indigenous wildlife and
avifauna along a corridor transecting
most of the San Fernando Valley, and
extending into downtown Los Angeles.
Other purposes include provision of
public access to the river, identification
of incidental recreation space, and
delineation of trails. Site-specific
Environmental Impact StatementEnvironment Impact Reports (EIS/EIR)
would be prepared in the future to
evaluate and document individual
projects that may result from this study.
ADDRESSES: U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Los Angeles District,
Environmental Resources Branch,
CESPL–PD–RN, 915 Wilshire
Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90017.
Attention to Randy Tabije, Ecosystem
Planning.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Randy Tabije, Environmental
Coordinator, (213) 452–3871 or e-mail at
Roland.R.Tabije@usace.army. mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Authorization. The proposed
feasibility study was authorized under
Congressional Resolution, which reads
as follows:
Senate Resolution, approved 25 June 1969,
reading in part: ‘‘Resolved by the Committee
on Public Works of the United States Senate,
that the Board of Engineers for Rivers and
Harbors, created under section 3 of the River
and Harbor Act, approved June 13, 1902, be,
and is hereby requested to review the report
of the Chief of Engineers on the Los Angeles
and San Gabriel Rivers and Ballona Creek,
California, published as House Document
Numbered 838, Seventy-sixth Congress, and
other pertinent reports, with a view to
determining whether any modifications
contained herein are advisable at the present
time, in the resources in the Los Angeles
County Drainage Area.’’
2. Background. The Los Angeles River
is subject to serious flooding and
experienced two major floods in the
1930’s that caused substantial loss of
life and substantial property damage.
During the late 1930’s, in response, the
Federal Government constructed the
concrete flood control channel in the
Los Angeles River. The City of Los
Angeles and other local agencies have
expressed interest and early support for
a feasibility study that would evaluate
the potential for restoration of
environmental resources on the Los
Angeles River.
3. Proposed Objectives. The proposed
objectives are as follows:
a. Restore a more natural riverine
environment along the river.
E:\FR\FM\06FEN1.SGM
06FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 24 (Monday, February 6, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6056-6058]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-1560]
[[Page 6056]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
Madrid Protocol
ACTION: Proposed collection; comment request.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part
of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden,
invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this
opportunity to comment on the revision of a continuing information
collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public
Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before April 7, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
E-mail: Susan.Brown@uspto.gov. Include ``0651-0051
comment'' in the subject line of the message.
Fax: 571-273-0112, marked to the attention of Susan Brown.
Mail: Susan K. Brown, Records Officer, Office of the Chief
Information Officer, Architecture, Engineering and Technical Services,
Data Architecture and Services Division, U.S. Patent and Trademark
Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450.
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information
should be directed to Sharon Marsh, Deputy Commissioner for Trademark
Examination Policy, Office of the Commissioner for Trademarks, U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1451, Alexandria, VA 22313-1451;
by telephone at 571-272-7140; or by e-mail at Sharon.Marsh@uspto.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Abstract
This collection of information is required by the Trademark Act of
1946, 15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq., which provides for the Federal
registration of trademarks, service marks, collective trademarks and
service marks, collective membership marks, and certification marks.
Individuals and businesses that use or intend to use such marks in
commerce may file an application to register the marks with the United
States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
The Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the
International Registration of Marks (``Madrid Protocol'') is an
international treaty that allows a trademark owner to seek registration
in any of the participating countries by filing a single international
application. The International Bureau (``IB'') of the World
Intellectual Property Organization (``WIPO'') in Geneva, Switzerland,
administers the international registration system. The Madrid Protocol
Implementation Act of 2002 amended the Trademark Act to provide that:
(1) The owner of a U.S. application or registration may seek protection
of its mark in any of the participating countries by submitting a
single international application to the IB through the USPTO, and (2)
the holder of an international registration may request an extension of
protection of the international registration to the United States. The
Madrid Protocol became effective in the United States on November 2,
2003, and is implemented under 37 CFR part 2 and part 7. An
international application submitted through the USPTO must be based on
an active U.S. application or registration and must be filed by the
owner of the application or registration. The USPTO reviews the
international application to certify that it corresponds to the
existing U.S. application or registration before forwarding the
international application to the IB. The IB then reviews the
international application and sends a notice of irregularity to the
USPTO and the applicant if the application does not meet the filing
requirements of the Madrid Protocol. After any irregularities are
corrected, the IB will then register the mark and notify each country
designated in the application of the request for extension of
protection. The holder of the international registration may also
request an extension of protection to additional countries by filing a
subsequent designation.
Under section 71 of the Trademark Act, a registered extension of
protection to the United States will be cancelled unless the holder of
the international registration periodically files affidavits of use in
commerce or excusable nonuse. Since these affidavits cannot be filed
until five years after the USPTO registers an extension of protection,
the USPTO will not accept these affidavits until after November 2,
2008, and their estimated burden will not be included in this
collection at this time.
This collection includes the information necessary for the USPTO to
process applications for international registration and related
requests under the Madrid Protocol. The USPTO provides electronic forms
for filing the Application for International Registration, Subsequent
Designation, and Response to a Notice of Irregularity through the
Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), which is accessible via
the USPTO Web site. An electronic form for the Request for
Transformation is under development. Applicants may also submit the
items in this collection on paper or by using the forms provided by the
IB, which are available on the WIPO Web site. The IB requires
Applications for International Registration and Subsequent Designations
that are filed on paper to be submitted on the official IB forms. The
USPTO is adding one petition to this collection, the Petition to Review
Refusal to Certify an International Application.
II. Method of Collection
By mail, hand delivery, or electronically to the USPTO.
III. Data
OMB Number: 0651-0051.
Form Number(s): PTO-2131, PTO-2132, PTO-2133.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Affected Public: Individuals or households; businesses or other
for-profits; not-for-profit institutions; farms; the Federal
Government; and state, local or tribal governments.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 4,312 responses per year.
Estimated Time Per Response: The USPTO estimates that it will take
the public approximately two minutes to one hour (0.03 to 1.0 hours) to
complete the information in this collection, including the time to
gather the necessary information, prepare the documents, and submit the
completed request to the USPTO.
Estimated Total Annual Respondent Burden Hours: 1,012 hours per
year.
Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost Burden: $289,432 per year.
The USPTO expects that the information in this collection will be
prepared by attorneys. Using the professional rate of $286 per hour for
associate attorneys in private firms, the USPTO estimates that the
respondent cost burden for submitting the information in this
collection will be approximately $289,432 per year.
[[Page 6057]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated time Estimated Estimated
Item for response annual annual burden
(minutes) responses hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application for International Registration (PTO-2131)........... 15 3,600 900
Subsequent Designation (PTO-2132)............................... 3 135 7
Response to Notice of Irregularities Issued by the IB in 10 540 92
Connection with International Applications (PTO-2133)..........
Request that the USPTO Replace a U.S. Registration with a 2 7 1
Subsequently Registered Extension of Protection to the United
States.........................................................
Request to Record an Assignment or Restriction of a Holder's 5 10 1
Right to Dispose of an International Registration..............
Request that the USPTO Transform a Cancelled Extension of 5 10 1
Protection into an Application for Registration under section 1
or 44 of the Act...............................................
Petition to Review Refusal to Certify an International 60 10 10
Application....................................................
Affidavit of Continued Use or Excusable Nonuse under section 71 14 (\1\) 0
of the Act.....................................................
-----------------
Total....................................................... .............. 4,312 1,012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ None until November 2008.
Estimated Total Annual Non-hour Respondent Cost Burden: $470,031.
There are no capital start-up, maintenance, or recordkeeping costs
associated with this information collection. However, this collection
does have annual (non-hour) costs in the form of filing costs and
postage costs.
The USPTO charges fees for processing international applications
and related requests under the Madrid Protocol as set forth in 37 CFR
7.6. In addition to these USPTO fees, applicants must also pay
international filing fees to the IB as indicated in 37 CFR 7.7. The
USPTO estimates that the total filing costs in the form of USPTO
processing fees associated with this collection will be approximately
$469,950 per year as calculated in the accompanying table.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Estimated
Item annual Fee amount annual filing
responses costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application for International Registration, for certifying an 1,800 $100 $180,000
international application based on a single basic application
or registration (per international class)......................
Application for International Registration, for certifying an 1,800 150 270,000
international application based on more than one basic
application or registration (per international class)..........
Subsequent Designation.......................................... 135 100 13,500
Response to Notice of Irregularities Issued by the IB in 540 0 0
Connection with International Applications.....................
Request that the USPTO Replace a U.S. Registration with a 7 100 700
Subsequently Registered Extension of Protection to the United
States (per international class)...............................
Request to Record an Assignment or Restriction of a Holder's 10 100 1,000
Right to Dispose of an International Registration..............
Request that the USPTO Transform a Cancelled Extension of 10 375 3,750
Protection into an Application for Registration under section 1
or 44 of the Act...............................................
Petition to Review Refusal to Certify an International 10 100 1,000
Application....................................................
Affidavit of Continued Use or Excusable Nonuse under section 71 (1) 100 0
of the Act (per international class)...........................
-----------------
Total....................................................... 4,312 .............. 469,950
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ None until November 2008.
The public may submit the items in this collection to the USPTO by
mail through the United States Postal Service. The USPTO estimates that
approximately 208 of the 4,312 responses per year will be submitted by
mail and that the average first-class postage cost for a mailed
submission will be 39 cents, for a total postage cost of approximately
$81 per year.
The total non-hour respondent cost burden for this collection in
the form of filing costs and postage costs is estimated to be $470,031
per year.
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information;
(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on respondents, e.g., the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized or
included in the request for OMB approval of this information
collection; they also will become a matter of public record.
[[Page 6058]]
Dated: January 31, 2006.
Susan K. Brown,
Records Officer, USPTO, Office of the Chief Information Officer,
Architecture, Engineering and Technical Services, Data Architecture and
Services Division.
[FR Doc. E6-1560 Filed 2-3-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P
