Coding of Design Marks in Registrations, 81587-81589 [2010-32564]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Notices
Although non-emergency issues not
contained in this agenda may come
before these groups for discussion, those
issues may not be the subject of formal
action during these meetings. Action
will be restricted to those issues
specifically listed in this notice and any
issues arising after publication of this
notice that require emergency action
under section 305(c) of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, provided the public
has been notified of the Council’s intent
to take final action to address the
emergency.
Special Accommodations
These meetings are physically
accessible to people with disabilities.
Requests for sign language
interpretation or other auxiliary aids
should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds,
(808) 522–8220 (voice) or (808) 522–
8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the
meeting date.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: December 22, 2010.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–32595 Filed 12–27–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
[Docket No. PTO–T–2010–0090]
Coding of Design Marks in
Registrations
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (‘‘USPTO’’) proposes
to discontinue its secondary design
coding, the practice of coding newly
registered trademarks in its searchable
electronic database with design mark
codes based on the old paper search
designations.
DATES: Comments must be received by
January 27, 2011 to ensure
consideration.
Addresses for Comments: The USPTO
prefers that comments be submitted via
electronic mail message to
TMFRNotices@uspto.gov. Written
comments may also be submitted by
mail to: Commissioner for Trademarks,
P.O. Box 1451, Alexandria, VA 22313–
1451, attention Cynthia C. Lynch; by
hand-delivery to the Trademark
Assistance Center, Concourse Level,
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:37 Dec 27, 2010
Jkt 223001
James Madison Building-East Wing, 600
Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia,
attention Cynthia C. Lynch; or by
electronic mail message via the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. See the Federal
eRulemaking Portal Web site (https://
www.regulations.gov) for additional
instructions on providing comments via
the Federal eRulemaking Portal. The
comments will be available for public
inspection on the USPTO’s Web site at
https://www.uspto.gov and will also be
available at the Trademark Legal Policy
Office, Madison East, Fourth Floor, 600
Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Cynthia C. Lynch, Office of the Deputy
Commissioner for Trademark
Examination Policy, by telephone at
(571) 272–8742.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 41(i)(1)–(2), the
USPTO maintains a publicly available
searchable collection of all United
States trademark registrations. Initially,
the collection was provided in paper
form only. Currently, the USPTO
provides the collection in electronic
form.
When the trademark collection was
maintained in paper form, marks were
searched in tall cabinets located at the
USPTO’s Public Search Facility. In
addition to the public, trademark
examiners searched using the paper
collection to determine whether
registration should be refused pursuant
to 15 U.S.C. 1052(d). Design marks were
separated into design categories, groups,
types, or divisions, subdivided into
specific representations according to the
U.S. class of goods or services covered
in the registrations, and then arranged
in ascending order by registration
number. Marks with multiple design
elements generally had to be searched
separately, which was both challenging
and time-consuming.
In an effort to improve the efficiency
of searching for the public and USPTO
examiners, the USPTO began
developing a searchable electronic
database of marks in 1982. By 1988, the
USPTO’s trademark examining
attorneys used the automated system
exclusively to conduct their searches.
The USPTO also began to provide
public access to the trademark database
of active registered and pending marks
through the Public Search Facility and
later on the USPTO Web site.
When developing the new automated
search system, the USPTO also
developed a new numerical design code
system, modeled after the International
Classification of the Figurative Elements
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
81587
of Marks (‘‘USPTO Design
Classification’’), which was intended for
an electronic environment and would
enable searching multiple design
elements in one search. In this system,
each design element is generally
assigned a six-digit numerical code: the
first two digits indicate the category
type (e.g., category 01 is celestial bodies,
natural phenomena, and geographical
maps), the next two digits indicate the
division (e.g., 07 is globes), and the last
two digits indicate the section (e.g.,
section 05 is globes held by a human).
This numerical design code system is
more robust than the paper search
design code system, which relies
exclusively on a word or term to
identify a design element and cannot
achieve the level of detail of the
numerical system.
In conjunction with the new design
code system, the USPTO also provided
(and continues to provide) a Design
Search Code Manual (‘‘Manual’’) that
includes an index, provides guidance on
and examples, cross-references related
material, and gives tips on searching
using this system. The Manual is
available to the public on the USPTO
Web site.
In 2002, the USPTO submitted a
report to Congress detailing a plan for
the removal of a portion of its paper
search collection. However, in response
to public concern about relying
exclusively on the electronic system, the
USPTO decided to temporarily retain
the paper collection of registrations with
design coding, while improving the
accuracy of its electronic database, and
modified its plan accordingly.
In 2007, the USPTO submitted a new
report to Congress with updated
information about the improved
accuracy of its electronic database and
USPTO Design Classification coding,
microfilmed all paper trademark
registrations that include design
elements, and removed the entire paper
search collection from its search facility.
At the same time, the USPTO replicated
in the automated search system the
paper design code system, exhibiting
these word-based codes in a new data
field for the electronic search system
called the Trademark Search Facility
Classification Code Index (‘‘TC Index’’).
The TC Index allowed those who
wished to search using the old paper
designations to continue to do so in the
electronic database.
Proposed Changes
After more than three years of coding
under both the TC Index and USPTO
Design Classification systems, the
USPTO proposes to discontinue
applying the TC Index code system to
E:\FR\FM\28DEN1.SGM
28DEN1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
81588
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Notices
registrations because it is no longer costeffective and is never used by USPTO
examining attorneys and rarely used by
the public.
Currently, the assignment of TC Index
codes to active U.S. trademark
registrations in the searchable electronic
database costs approximately $531,000
per fiscal year for staffing and systems
maintenance and support costs.
Terminating the dual design-coding
system will result in cost savings and
will free the staff to perform more
valuable services for the public.
Searches based on the TC Index
coding appear to be quite minimal. For
example, Trademark Electronic Search
System (‘‘TESS’’) searches conducted
from January 1, 2010 though July 31,
2010, show that of the on-average
2,531,680 searches conducted per
month, on average only 229 employed
the TC Index coding to search. By
contrast, 2,805 searches, on average,
relied on the USPTO Design
Classification. Thus, the vast majority of
design searches are currently performed
using the USPTO Design Classification
system. USPTO examining attorneys
also rely exclusively on the USPTO
Design Classification system to search.
Compared with the USPTO Design
Classification coding system, the TC
Index coding system provides little or
no benefit to users that would justify the
cost to maintain it. The very general
categories of designs result in
cumbersome and time-consuming
searches, generating sometimes
enormous results lists for users to
review. For example, the TC Index
coding system groups stars under the
design code SHAPES–ASTRO, which
encompasses all astronomical shapes
consisting of celestial bodies (such as
the moon, sun, stars, planets, etc.),
globes, and geographical maps.
Searching this TC design code generates
approximately 16,001 registrations and
there is no mechanism for restricting the
search to five-pointed stars, or sixpointed stars, or groups of stars. Users
must expend considerable time
reviewing all registered marks
containing celestial bodies, globes, and
geographical marks to locate the specific
types of star marks that are of interest
to them.
Searches using the TC Index codes
can also provide imperfect results. For
example, the TC Index does not have a
specific code for Braille, and images are
coded as SHAPES–CIRCLES, which
retrieves over 45,000 search results.
Searching large numbers of circles is an
inefficient way to locate Braille marks.
Searches generally are also less accurate
than those performed using the USPTO
Design Classification coding system.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:37 Dec 27, 2010
Jkt 223001
By contrast, advances in coding under
the USPTO Design Classification and its
greater specificity provide the public
with more precise and accurate search
results than are currently available
through the use of the TC Index codes.
Additionally, the USPTO Design
Classification is applied to pending
applications for marks with designs as
well as to registered marks with designs,
thereby making it more useful in
assessing potential likelihood of
confusion. Examining attorneys rely
solely on the USPTO Design
Classification for examining and
approving applications for marks with
design codes for Federal registration.
The USPTO invests heavily in its
electronic search systems, and commits
considerable resources to ensuring the
quality of design coding under the
USPTO Design Classification system.
When an application with design
elements is filed, specially trained
Federal employees in the PreExamination section of the USPTO
review the mark drawing and assign
USPTO Design Classification codes. In
2008, the USPTO amended the Rules of
Practice in trademark cases to require a
description of any mark not in standard
character, in order to obtain the
applicant’s characterization of design
elements to assist the USPTO in making
accurate and comprehensive designcoding determinations. For example,
employees use the applicant’s mark
description to clarify ambiguous design
elements, thereby promoting correct
design coding. The USPTO continues to
provide comprehensive training to PreExamination employees on coding
marks with design elements to ensure
accuracy in coding. In addition, the
USPTO performs quality review of the
work of the employees, which improves
confidence in the consistency and
accuracy of the design coding.
The design coding in an application is
reviewed again when a mark with
design elements is assigned to a welltrained examining attorney to determine
whether Federal law permits
registration. The examining attorney
reviews the mark, the design codes, and
the mark description and may
determine whether codes should be
added or deleted. In 2008, the USPTO
also provided rigorous training to its
Legal Instruments Examiners, who assist
in reviewing and updating application
and registration data, on coding under
the USPTO Design Classification. This
review of design coding by different
groups at the USPTO has greatly
increased accuracy and decreased
subjectivity in coding.
The USPTO Design Classification
codes are also subject to external review
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
by the public, which further ensures
correct design coding. Each applicant
for a mark that includes a design
element receives a notice from the
USPTO identifying the USPTO Design
Classification codes assigned to their
mark and providing detailed
instructions on how to suggest additions
or revisions to the assigned codes. Since
2005, the USPTO has sent
approximately 367,000 such notices.
These notices provide applicants with
an opportunity to enhance the quality of
the design coding of marks with design
elements.
After a mark registers, filing receipts
for post-registration filings submitted
via the Trademark Electronic
Application System notify registrants of
the ability to request additions or
corrections to the USPTO Design
Classification codes assigned to their
registered marks. Furthermore, upon
acceptance of a registrant’s Declaration
of Use and/or Excusable Nonuse of
Mark in Commerce under 15 U.S.C.
1058, the registration file is referred to
USPTO employees for yet another
review of the design codes assigned to
the mark. Upon completion of the
review, the USPTO notifies the
registrant of the USPTO Design
Classification codes assigned to their
registered mark and provides
information on revising design codes.
The USPTO Web site also provides
information on submitting corrections
or additions to design codes in
trademark applications and
registrations. Even members of the
public may submit a design coding
suggestion. These measures all help to
ensure a high level of coding accuracy.
The USPTO also updated the Manual
in 2006 to allow for greater precision in
identifying and coding designs. Many of
the larger design-code sections were
modified to create smaller sections. For
example, three new design code entries
for stars were added, which allow users
to narrow searches to specific types of
stars. These changes result in faster and
more efficient electronic searches with
little irrelevant data returned.
In view of the widespread use of the
USPTO Design Classification system, its
clear advantages and the limited use of
the TC Index system, the impact of
discontinuing coding based on the TC
index appears minimal. The public and
the USPTO will realize efficiencies. The
USPTO will be able to devote more of
its limited resources to the maintenance
and improvement of the USPTO Design
Classification system, which is more
widely used by the public. All existing
registrations coded with paper search
designations will remain available in
TESS and on microfilm. Design-coding
E:\FR\FM\28DEN1.SGM
28DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 28, 2010 / Notices
using the USPTO Design Classification
system has continually improved
through internal and external review of
the coding and through internal training
and quality-review procedures. The
USPTO Design Classification system
provides more accurate results, is
available to all members of the public
through the Internet, and is exclusively
used by the examining attorneys at the
USPTO.
Accordingly, the USPTO hereby gives
notice of its intent to discontinue coding
design marks with paper search
designations. Any interested member of
the public is invited to provide
comments on this plan within thirty
(30) days. The USPTO is providing this
opportunity for public comment
because the USPTO desires the benefit
of public comment on the proposal;
however, notice and an opportunity for
public comment are not required under
5 U.S.C. 553(b) or any other law. See
Cooper Techs. Co. v. Dudas, 536 F.3d
1330, 1336–37 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (stating
that 5 U.S.C. 553, and thus 35 U.S.C.
2(b)(2)(B), does not require notice and
comment rule making for
‘‘ ‘interpretative rules, general statements
of policy, or rules of agency
organization, procedure, or practice.’ ’’
(quoting 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A)). Persons
submitting written comments should
note that the USPTO may not provide a
‘‘comment and response’’ analysis of
such comments as notice and an
opportunity for public comment are not
required.
Three Lafayette Center, 1155 21st
St., NW., Washington, DC. Lobby Level
Hearing Room (Room 1000).
PLACE:
CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:
STATUS:
Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
Open.
MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The
Commission has scheduled these
meetings to consider the issuance of
various proposed rules. Agendas for
each of the scheduled meetings will be
made available to the public and posted
on the Commission’s Web site at
https://www.cftc.gov at least seven (7)
days prior to the meeting. In the event
that the times or dates of the meetings
change, an announcement of the change,
along with the new time and place of
the meeting will be posted on the
Commission’s Web site.
CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:
David A. Stawick, Secretary of the
Commission, 202–418–5071.
David A. Stawick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010–32780 Filed 12–23–10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351–01–P
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION
Sunshine Act Meetings
11 a.m., Friday, January
14, 2011.
PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington,
DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference
Room.
STATUS: Closed.
MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance
and Enforcement Matters.
CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Sauntia S. Warfield, 202–418–5084.
TIME AND DATE:
Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
BILLING CODE 6351–01–P
[FR Doc. 2010–32781 Filed 12–23–10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351–01–P
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION
Sunshine Act Meetings
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION
Sunshine Act Meetings
TIME AND DATE:
11 a.m., Friday, January
28, 2011.
1155 21st St., NW., Washington,
DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference
Room.
PLACE:
and Enforcement Matters.
[FR Doc. 2010–32564 Filed 12–27–10; 8:45 am]
CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:
BILLING CODE 3510–16–P
Sauntia S. Warfield, 202–418–5084.
STATUS:
Closed.
MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
Surveillance
Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010–32783 Filed 12–23–10; 4:15 pm]
11 a.m., Friday January
21, 2011.
PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington,
DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference
Room.
STATUS: Closed.
MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
Surveillance and Enforcement Matters.
CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Sauntia S. Warfield, 202–418–5084.
TIME AND DATE:
Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010–32782 Filed 12–23–10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351–01–P
BILLING CODE 6351–01–P
Sunshine Act Meetings
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION
The following notice of scheduled
meetings is published pursuant to the
provisions of the Government in the
Sunshine Act, Public Law 94–409,
5 U.S.C. 552b.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Sauntia S. Warfield, 202–418–5084.
[FR Doc. 2010–32749 Filed 12–23–10; 4:15 pm]
Dated: December 21, 2010.
David J. Kappos,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual
Property and Director of the United States
Patent and Trademark Office.
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION
Sunshine Act Meetings
TIME AND DATE:
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary of Defense
Notice of Advisory Committee Meeting
Date Change
11 a.m., Friday, January
AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETINGS:
AGENCY:
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.
7, 2011.
PLACE:
1155 21st St., NW., Washington,
DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference
Room.
ACTION:
The Commission has
scheduled two meetings for the
following dates:
January 13, 2011 at 9:30 a.m.
January 20, 2011 at 9:30 a.m.
TIMES AND DATES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:37 Dec 27, 2010
Jkt 223001
81589
STATUS:
Closed.
MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
Surveillance
and Enforcement Matters.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Missile Defense Agency (MDA),
DoD.
Notice.
On Tuesday, December 14,
2010, the Department of Defense
announced by publication in the
Federal Register (75 FR 77848) closed
meetings of the Missile Defense
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\28DEN1.SGM
28DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 28, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 81587-81589]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32564]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
[Docket No. PTO-T-2010-0090]
Coding of Design Marks in Registrations
AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (``USPTO'')
proposes to discontinue its secondary design coding, the practice of
coding newly registered trademarks in its searchable electronic
database with design mark codes based on the old paper search
designations.
DATES: Comments must be received by January 27, 2011 to ensure
consideration.
Addresses for Comments: The USPTO prefers that comments be
submitted via electronic mail message to TMFRNotices@uspto.gov. Written
comments may also be submitted by mail to: Commissioner for Trademarks,
P.O. Box 1451, Alexandria, VA 22313-1451, attention Cynthia C. Lynch;
by hand-delivery to the Trademark Assistance Center, Concourse Level,
James Madison Building-East Wing, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria,
Virginia, attention Cynthia C. Lynch; or by electronic mail message via
the Federal eRulemaking Portal. See the Federal eRulemaking Portal Web
site (https://www.regulations.gov) for additional instructions on
providing comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal. The comments
will be available for public inspection on the USPTO's Web site at
https://www.uspto.gov and will also be available at the Trademark Legal
Policy Office, Madison East, Fourth Floor, 600 Dulany Street,
Alexandria, Virginia.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia C. Lynch, Office of the Deputy
Commissioner for Trademark Examination Policy, by telephone at (571)
272-8742.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 41(i)(1)-(2), the USPTO maintains a publicly
available searchable collection of all United States trademark
registrations. Initially, the collection was provided in paper form
only. Currently, the USPTO provides the collection in electronic form.
When the trademark collection was maintained in paper form, marks
were searched in tall cabinets located at the USPTO's Public Search
Facility. In addition to the public, trademark examiners searched using
the paper collection to determine whether registration should be
refused pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1052(d). Design marks were separated into
design categories, groups, types, or divisions, subdivided into
specific representations according to the U.S. class of goods or
services covered in the registrations, and then arranged in ascending
order by registration number. Marks with multiple design elements
generally had to be searched separately, which was both challenging and
time-consuming.
In an effort to improve the efficiency of searching for the public
and USPTO examiners, the USPTO began developing a searchable electronic
database of marks in 1982. By 1988, the USPTO's trademark examining
attorneys used the automated system exclusively to conduct their
searches. The USPTO also began to provide public access to the
trademark database of active registered and pending marks through the
Public Search Facility and later on the USPTO Web site.
When developing the new automated search system, the USPTO also
developed a new numerical design code system, modeled after the
International Classification of the Figurative Elements of Marks
(``USPTO Design Classification''), which was intended for an electronic
environment and would enable searching multiple design elements in one
search. In this system, each design element is generally assigned a
six-digit numerical code: the first two digits indicate the category
type (e.g., category 01 is celestial bodies, natural phenomena, and
geographical maps), the next two digits indicate the division (e.g., 07
is globes), and the last two digits indicate the section (e.g., section
05 is globes held by a human). This numerical design code system is
more robust than the paper search design code system, which relies
exclusively on a word or term to identify a design element and cannot
achieve the level of detail of the numerical system.
In conjunction with the new design code system, the USPTO also
provided (and continues to provide) a Design Search Code Manual
(``Manual'') that includes an index, provides guidance on and examples,
cross-references related material, and gives tips on searching using
this system. The Manual is available to the public on the USPTO Web
site.
In 2002, the USPTO submitted a report to Congress detailing a plan
for the removal of a portion of its paper search collection. However,
in response to public concern about relying exclusively on the
electronic system, the USPTO decided to temporarily retain the paper
collection of registrations with design coding, while improving the
accuracy of its electronic database, and modified its plan accordingly.
In 2007, the USPTO submitted a new report to Congress with updated
information about the improved accuracy of its electronic database and
USPTO Design Classification coding, microfilmed all paper trademark
registrations that include design elements, and removed the entire
paper search collection from its search facility. At the same time, the
USPTO replicated in the automated search system the paper design code
system, exhibiting these word-based codes in a new data field for the
electronic search system called the Trademark Search Facility
Classification Code Index (``TC Index''). The TC Index allowed those
who wished to search using the old paper designations to continue to do
so in the electronic database.
Proposed Changes
After more than three years of coding under both the TC Index and
USPTO Design Classification systems, the USPTO proposes to discontinue
applying the TC Index code system to
[[Page 81588]]
registrations because it is no longer cost-effective and is never used
by USPTO examining attorneys and rarely used by the public.
Currently, the assignment of TC Index codes to active U.S.
trademark registrations in the searchable electronic database costs
approximately $531,000 per fiscal year for staffing and systems
maintenance and support costs. Terminating the dual design-coding
system will result in cost savings and will free the staff to perform
more valuable services for the public.
Searches based on the TC Index coding appear to be quite minimal.
For example, Trademark Electronic Search System (``TESS'') searches
conducted from January 1, 2010 though July 31, 2010, show that of the
on-average 2,531,680 searches conducted per month, on average only 229
employed the TC Index coding to search. By contrast, 2,805 searches, on
average, relied on the USPTO Design Classification. Thus, the vast
majority of design searches are currently performed using the USPTO
Design Classification system. USPTO examining attorneys also rely
exclusively on the USPTO Design Classification system to search.
Compared with the USPTO Design Classification coding system, the TC
Index coding system provides little or no benefit to users that would
justify the cost to maintain it. The very general categories of designs
result in cumbersome and time-consuming searches, generating sometimes
enormous results lists for users to review. For example, the TC Index
coding system groups stars under the design code SHAPES-ASTRO, which
encompasses all astronomical shapes consisting of celestial bodies
(such as the moon, sun, stars, planets, etc.), globes, and geographical
maps. Searching this TC design code generates approximately 16,001
registrations and there is no mechanism for restricting the search to
five-pointed stars, or six-pointed stars, or groups of stars. Users
must expend considerable time reviewing all registered marks containing
celestial bodies, globes, and geographical marks to locate the specific
types of star marks that are of interest to them.
Searches using the TC Index codes can also provide imperfect
results. For example, the TC Index does not have a specific code for
Braille, and images are coded as SHAPES-CIRCLES, which retrieves over
45,000 search results. Searching large numbers of circles is an
inefficient way to locate Braille marks. Searches generally are also
less accurate than those performed using the USPTO Design
Classification coding system.
By contrast, advances in coding under the USPTO Design
Classification and its greater specificity provide the public with more
precise and accurate search results than are currently available
through the use of the TC Index codes. Additionally, the USPTO Design
Classification is applied to pending applications for marks with
designs as well as to registered marks with designs, thereby making it
more useful in assessing potential likelihood of confusion. Examining
attorneys rely solely on the USPTO Design Classification for examining
and approving applications for marks with design codes for Federal
registration.
The USPTO invests heavily in its electronic search systems, and
commits considerable resources to ensuring the quality of design coding
under the USPTO Design Classification system. When an application with
design elements is filed, specially trained Federal employees in the
Pre-Examination section of the USPTO review the mark drawing and assign
USPTO Design Classification codes. In 2008, the USPTO amended the Rules
of Practice in trademark cases to require a description of any mark not
in standard character, in order to obtain the applicant's
characterization of design elements to assist the USPTO in making
accurate and comprehensive design-coding determinations. For example,
employees use the applicant's mark description to clarify ambiguous
design elements, thereby promoting correct design coding. The USPTO
continues to provide comprehensive training to Pre-Examination
employees on coding marks with design elements to ensure accuracy in
coding. In addition, the USPTO performs quality review of the work of
the employees, which improves confidence in the consistency and
accuracy of the design coding.
The design coding in an application is reviewed again when a mark
with design elements is assigned to a well-trained examining attorney
to determine whether Federal law permits registration. The examining
attorney reviews the mark, the design codes, and the mark description
and may determine whether codes should be added or deleted. In 2008,
the USPTO also provided rigorous training to its Legal Instruments
Examiners, who assist in reviewing and updating application and
registration data, on coding under the USPTO Design Classification.
This review of design coding by different groups at the USPTO has
greatly increased accuracy and decreased subjectivity in coding.
The USPTO Design Classification codes are also subject to external
review by the public, which further ensures correct design coding. Each
applicant for a mark that includes a design element receives a notice
from the USPTO identifying the USPTO Design Classification codes
assigned to their mark and providing detailed instructions on how to
suggest additions or revisions to the assigned codes. Since 2005, the
USPTO has sent approximately 367,000 such notices. These notices
provide applicants with an opportunity to enhance the quality of the
design coding of marks with design elements.
After a mark registers, filing receipts for post-registration
filings submitted via the Trademark Electronic Application System
notify registrants of the ability to request additions or corrections
to the USPTO Design Classification codes assigned to their registered
marks. Furthermore, upon acceptance of a registrant's Declaration of
Use and/or Excusable Nonuse of Mark in Commerce under 15 U.S.C. 1058,
the registration file is referred to USPTO employees for yet another
review of the design codes assigned to the mark. Upon completion of the
review, the USPTO notifies the registrant of the USPTO Design
Classification codes assigned to their registered mark and provides
information on revising design codes. The USPTO Web site also provides
information on submitting corrections or additions to design codes in
trademark applications and registrations. Even members of the public
may submit a design coding suggestion. These measures all help to
ensure a high level of coding accuracy.
The USPTO also updated the Manual in 2006 to allow for greater
precision in identifying and coding designs. Many of the larger design-
code sections were modified to create smaller sections. For example,
three new design code entries for stars were added, which allow users
to narrow searches to specific types of stars. These changes result in
faster and more efficient electronic searches with little irrelevant
data returned.
In view of the widespread use of the USPTO Design Classification
system, its clear advantages and the limited use of the TC Index
system, the impact of discontinuing coding based on the TC index
appears minimal. The public and the USPTO will realize efficiencies.
The USPTO will be able to devote more of its limited resources to the
maintenance and improvement of the USPTO Design Classification system,
which is more widely used by the public. All existing registrations
coded with paper search designations will remain available in TESS and
on microfilm. Design-coding
[[Page 81589]]
using the USPTO Design Classification system has continually improved
through internal and external review of the coding and through internal
training and quality-review procedures. The USPTO Design Classification
system provides more accurate results, is available to all members of
the public through the Internet, and is exclusively used by the
examining attorneys at the USPTO.
Accordingly, the USPTO hereby gives notice of its intent to
discontinue coding design marks with paper search designations. Any
interested member of the public is invited to provide comments on this
plan within thirty (30) days. The USPTO is providing this opportunity
for public comment because the USPTO desires the benefit of public
comment on the proposal; however, notice and an opportunity for public
comment are not required under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) or any other law. See
Cooper Techs. Co. v. Dudas, 536 F.3d 1330, 1336-37 (Fed. Cir. 2008)
(stating that 5 U.S.C. 553, and thus 35 U.S.C. 2(b)(2)(B), does not
require notice and comment rule making for `` `interpretative rules,
general statements of policy, or rules of agency organization,
procedure, or practice.' '' (quoting 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A)). Persons
submitting written comments should note that the USPTO may not provide
a ``comment and response'' analysis of such comments as notice and an
opportunity for public comment are not required.
Dated: December 21, 2010.
David J. Kappos,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of
the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2010-32564 Filed 12-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P