Changes To Implement Provisions of the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020; Delay of Effective Date, 62463-62464 [2023-19669]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 12, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this rule
will not result in such expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
F. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023–01, Rev. 1, associated
implementing instructions and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST
5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have
determined that this action is one of a
category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves a safety
zone that will prohibit persons and
vessels from entering, transiting
through, anchoring in, or remaining
within a limited area on the navigable
waters of the Atlantic Ocean located
within the line connecting points
beginning at 31°59′43.62″ N,
080°49′58.74″ W, thence to 31°58′56.66″
N, 080°50′16.73″ W, thence to
31°59′5.73″ N, 080°50′49.50″ W, thence
to 31°59′52.64″ N, 080°50′31.52″ W, and
back to the beginning point, during Air
National Guard’s aerial demonstration
of the F–22A Raptor aircraft lasting
three hours. It is categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph
L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS
Instruction Manual 023–01–001–01,
Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this
determination is available in the docket.
For instructions on locating the docket,
see the ADDRESSES section of this
preamble.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places or vessels.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Sep 11, 2023
Jkt 259001
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.
2. Add § 165.T07–0709 to read as
follows:
■
§ 165.T07–0709 Safety Zone; Atlantic
Ocean, Tybee Island, GA.
(a) Location. The following regulated
area is a safety zone: All waters of the
Atlantic Ocean, located within the line
connecting points beginning at
31°59′43.62″ N, 080°49′58.74″ W, thence
to 31°58′56.66″ N, 080°50′16.73″ W,
thence to 31°59′5.73″ N, 080°50′49.50″
W, thence to 31°59′52.64″ N,
080°50′31.52″ W, and back to the
beginning point. All coordinates are
World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS 84).
(b) Definition. As used in this section,
designated representative means a Coast
Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or
other officer operating a Coast Guard
vessel and a Federal, State, and local
officer designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Savannah (COTP) in
the enforcement of the safety zone.
(c) Regulations. (1) All persons and
vessels are prohibited from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within the regulated area
described in paragraph (a) of this
section unless authorized by the COTP
or a designated representative.
(2) Persons or vessels desiring to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or
remain within the safety zone may
contact COTP by telephone at 912–247–
0073, or a designated representative via
VHF radio on channel 16, to request
authorization. If authorization is
granted, all persons and vessels
receiving such authorization must
comply with the instructions of the
COTP Savannah or a designated
representative.
(3) The Coast Guard will provide
notice of the regulated area by Broadcast
Notice to Mariners via VHF–FM channel
16, and/or by on-scene designated
representatives.
(d) Enforcement period. This section
will be enforced from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m.
on September 13, 2023.
Dated: September 1, 2023.
Nathaniel L. Robinson,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of
the Port Savannah.
[FR Doc. 2023–19559 Filed 9–11–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
62463
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark
Office
37 CFR Parts 2 and 7
[Docket No. PTO–T–2021–0008]
RIN 0651–AD71
Changes To Implement Provisions of
the Trademark Modernization Act of
2020; Delay of Effective Date
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, U.S. Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective
date.
AGENCY:
On November 17, 2021, the
United States Patent and Trademark
Office (USPTO) published in the
Federal Register a final rule amending
its regulations to implement provisions
of the Trademark Modernization Act of
2020 (TMA) concerning new response
periods and extensions in the
examination of post-registration filings.
Those provisions had an effective date
of December 1, 2022. On October 13,
2022, the provisions regarding
responses and extensions in the
examination of post-registration filings
were subsequently delayed until
October 7, 2023. This notice further
delays the provisions that address the
post-registration provisions until the
spring or early summer of 2024.
DATES: As of September 12, 2023, the
effective date for amendatory
instructions 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 37, 38,
and 39 amending 37 CFR 2.163, 2.165,
2.176, 2.184, 2.186, 7.6, 7.39, and 7.40,
respectively, in the final rule published
at 86 FR 64300 on November 17, 2021,
delayed at 87 FR 62032 on October 13,
2022, is delayed indefinitely. Also, as of
September 12, 2023, the effective date of
the amendment to 37 CFR 2.6 in the
final rule published at 87 FR 62032 on
October 13, 2022, is delayed
indefinitely. The USPTO will publish a
forthcoming Federal Register document
announcing a new effective date.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Catherine Cain, Office of the Deputy
Commissioner for Trademark
Examination Policy, at 571–272–8946.
You can also send inquiries to
TMFRNotices@uspto.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
November 17, 2021, the USPTO
published in the Federal Register a final
rule amending the Rules of Practice in
Trademark Cases to implement
provisions of the TMA. See Changes To
Implement Provisions of the Trademark
Modernization Act of 2020 (86 FR
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\12SER1.SGM
12SER1
62464
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 12, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
64300). That final rule was published
under Regulatory Identification Number
(RIN) 0651–AD55. As part of that final
rule, the USPTO set a period of three
months for responses to postregistration office actions and provided
the option to request a single threemonth extension of the deadline, subject
to the payment of a fee. The final rule
stated that the post-registration changes
would go into effect on December 1,
2022.
On October 13, 2022, the USPTO
published in the Federal Register a final
rule delaying the effective date for
responses and extensions in the
examination of post-registration filings
from December 1, 2022, until October 7,
2023. See Changes To Implement
Provisions of the Trademark
Modernization Act of 2020; Delay of
Effective Date and Correction (87 FR
62032).
Under this final rule, the USPTO is
further delaying the provisions that
address post-registration responses and
extensions. The USPTO anticipates that
these provisions will go into effect
sometime in the spring or early summer
of 2024.
The USPTO is currently upgrading its
internal and public databases, search
system, and internal examination
systems. These major updates will
provide far-reaching efficiencies for
both customers and staff. The
implementation of the regulatory
changes to post-registration responses
and extensions cannot be completed
until the migration to the new systems
is complete. The USPTO anticipates that
this will occur in the spring or early
summer of 2024. The delay will also
provide the public with additional time
to prepare for the new response periods.
The USPTO will publish a final rule in
the Federal Register providing the new
effective date of the provisions
addressing post-registration responses
and extensions once it has been
determined.
In the final rule published at 86 FR
64300, the cross-reference in 37 CFR
7.40(b) to ‘‘§ 7.39(b) and (c)’’ is
incorrect. The reference should have
been to ‘‘§ 7.39(a) and (b).’’ When the
USPTO publishes a final rule providing
the new effective date of the provisions
addressing post-registration responses
and extensions, that section will also be
corrected.
Rulemaking Requirements
A. Administrative Procedure Act: The
changes in this rulemaking involve rules
of agency practice and procedure, and/
or interpretive rules. See Perez v. Mortg.
Bankers Ass’n, 135 S. Ct. 1199, 1204
(2015) (Interpretive rules ‘‘advise the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Sep 11, 2023
Jkt 259001
public of the agency’s construction of
the statutes and rules which it
administers.’’ (citation and internal
quotation marks omitted)); Nat’l Org. of
Veterans’ Advocates v. Sec’y of Veterans
Affairs, 260 F.3d 1365, 1375 (Fed. Cir.
2001) (Rule that clarifies interpretation
of a statute is interpretive.); Bachow
Commc’ns Inc. v. FCC, 237 F.3d 683,
690 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (Rules governing an
application process are procedural
under the Administrative Procedure
Act.); Inova Alexandria Hosp. v.
Shalala, 244 F.3d 342, 350 (4th Cir.
2001) (Rules for handling appeals were
procedural where they did not change
the substantive standard for reviewing
claims.).
Accordingly, prior notice and an
opportunity for public comment for the
changes in this rulemaking are not
required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b) or
(c), or any other law. See Perez, 135 S.
Ct. at 1206 (Notice-and-comment
procedures are required neither when
an agency ‘‘issue[s] an initial
interpretive rule’’ nor ‘‘when it amends
or repeals that interpretive rule.’’);
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-andcomment rulemaking for ‘‘interpretative
rules, general statements of policy, or
rules of agency organization, procedure,
or practice’’ (quoting 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A))).
Moreover, the Under Secretary of
Commerce for Intellectual Property and
Director of the USPTO, pursuant to the
authority at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), finds
good cause to adopt the change to the
effective date without prior notice and
an opportunity for public comment, as
such procedures would be impracticable
and contrary to the public interest. The
USPTO is currently upgrading its
internal and public databases, search
system, and internal examination
systems. These major updates will
provide far-reaching efficiencies for
both customers and staff. The
implementation of the regulatory
changes to post-registration responses
and extensions cannot be completed
until the migration to the new systems
is complete. The USPTO anticipates that
this will occur in the spring or early
summer of 2024. The delay will also
provide the public with additional time
to prepare for the new response periods.
Delay of this provision to provide prior
notice and comment procedures is also
impracticable because it would allow
the provisions to go into effect before
the agency is ready to implement the
regulatory changes regarding postregistration responses and extensions.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The Director also finds good cause
under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to waive the
30-day delay in effectiveness of this
rule. Immediate implementation of the
delay in the effective date is in the
public interest because it will provide
the agency the ability to effectively
manage and utilize the resources needed
to complete all these initiatives. The
delay will also provide the public with
additional time to prepare for the new
response periods. Delay of this rule to
provide for the 30-day delay in
effectiveness is impracticable because it
would allow the provisions to go into
effect before the agency is ready to
implement the regulatory changes
regarding post-registration responses
and extensions.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act: As prior
notice and an opportunity for public
comment are not required pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553 or any other law, neither a
Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis nor a
certification under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is
required. See 5 U.S.C. 603.
C. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory
Planning and Review): This rule has
been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866
(Sept. 30, 1993).
Katherine K. Vidal,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual
Property and Director of the United States
Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2023–19669 Filed 9–11–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–16–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2020–0065; FRL–8786–01–
OCSPP]
Fluazaindolizine; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of
fluazaindolizine in or on multiple
commodities that are identified and
discussed later in this document. E.I. du
Pont de Nemours & Company
(‘‘DuPont’’, now Corteva) requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
September 12, 2023. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before November 13, 2023, and
must be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\12SER1.SGM
12SER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 12, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62463-62464]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19669]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
37 CFR Parts 2 and 7
[Docket No. PTO-T-2021-0008]
RIN 0651-AD71
Changes To Implement Provisions of the Trademark Modernization
Act of 2020; Delay of Effective Date
AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, U.S. Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective date.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On November 17, 2021, the United States Patent and Trademark
Office (USPTO) published in the Federal Register a final rule amending
its regulations to implement provisions of the Trademark Modernization
Act of 2020 (TMA) concerning new response periods and extensions in the
examination of post-registration filings. Those provisions had an
effective date of December 1, 2022. On October 13, 2022, the provisions
regarding responses and extensions in the examination of post-
registration filings were subsequently delayed until October 7, 2023.
This notice further delays the provisions that address the post-
registration provisions until the spring or early summer of 2024.
DATES: As of September 12, 2023, the effective date for amendatory
instructions 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 37, 38, and 39 amending 37 CFR 2.163,
2.165, 2.176, 2.184, 2.186, 7.6, 7.39, and 7.40, respectively, in the
final rule published at 86 FR 64300 on November 17, 2021, delayed at 87
FR 62032 on October 13, 2022, is delayed indefinitely. Also, as of
September 12, 2023, the effective date of the amendment to 37 CFR 2.6
in the final rule published at 87 FR 62032 on October 13, 2022, is
delayed indefinitely. The USPTO will publish a forthcoming Federal
Register document announcing a new effective date.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine Cain, Office of the Deputy
Commissioner for Trademark Examination Policy, at 571-272-8946. You can
also send inquiries to [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 17, 2021, the USPTO published in
the Federal Register a final rule amending the Rules of Practice in
Trademark Cases to implement provisions of the TMA. See Changes To
Implement Provisions of the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (86 FR
[[Page 62464]]
64300). That final rule was published under Regulatory Identification
Number (RIN) 0651-AD55. As part of that final rule, the USPTO set a
period of three months for responses to post-registration office
actions and provided the option to request a single three-month
extension of the deadline, subject to the payment of a fee. The final
rule stated that the post-registration changes would go into effect on
December 1, 2022.
On October 13, 2022, the USPTO published in the Federal Register a
final rule delaying the effective date for responses and extensions in
the examination of post-registration filings from December 1, 2022,
until October 7, 2023. See Changes To Implement Provisions of the
Trademark Modernization Act of 2020; Delay of Effective Date and
Correction (87 FR 62032).
Under this final rule, the USPTO is further delaying the provisions
that address post-registration responses and extensions. The USPTO
anticipates that these provisions will go into effect sometime in the
spring or early summer of 2024.
The USPTO is currently upgrading its internal and public databases,
search system, and internal examination systems. These major updates
will provide far-reaching efficiencies for both customers and staff.
The implementation of the regulatory changes to post-registration
responses and extensions cannot be completed until the migration to the
new systems is complete. The USPTO anticipates that this will occur in
the spring or early summer of 2024. The delay will also provide the
public with additional time to prepare for the new response periods.
The USPTO will publish a final rule in the Federal Register providing
the new effective date of the provisions addressing post-registration
responses and extensions once it has been determined.
In the final rule published at 86 FR 64300, the cross-reference in
37 CFR 7.40(b) to ``Sec. 7.39(b) and (c)'' is incorrect. The reference
should have been to ``Sec. 7.39(a) and (b).'' When the USPTO publishes
a final rule providing the new effective date of the provisions
addressing post-registration responses and extensions, that section
will also be corrected.
Rulemaking Requirements
A. Administrative Procedure Act: The changes in this rulemaking
involve rules of agency practice and procedure, and/or interpretive
rules. See Perez v. Mortg. Bankers Ass'n, 135 S. Ct. 1199, 1204 (2015)
(Interpretive rules ``advise the public of the agency's construction of
the statutes and rules which it administers.'' (citation and internal
quotation marks omitted)); Nat'l Org. of Veterans' Advocates v. Sec'y
of Veterans Affairs, 260 F.3d 1365, 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (Rule that
clarifies interpretation of a statute is interpretive.); Bachow
Commc'ns Inc. v. FCC, 237 F.3d 683, 690 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (Rules
governing an application process are procedural under the
Administrative Procedure Act.); Inova Alexandria Hosp. v. Shalala, 244
F.3d 342, 350 (4th Cir. 2001) (Rules for handling appeals were
procedural where they did not change the substantive standard for
reviewing claims.).
Accordingly, prior notice and an opportunity for public comment for
the changes in this rulemaking are not required pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
553(b) or (c), or any other law. See Perez, 135 S. Ct. at 1206 (Notice-
and-comment procedures are required neither when an agency ``issue[s]
an initial interpretive rule'' nor ``when it amends or repeals that
interpretive rule.''); 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 rulemaking for
``interpretative rules, general statements of policy, or rules of
agency organization, procedure, or practice'' (quoting 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A))).
Moreover, the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property
and Director of the USPTO, pursuant to the authority at 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B), finds good cause to adopt the change to the effective date
without prior notice and an opportunity for public comment, as such
procedures would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.
The USPTO is currently upgrading its internal and public databases,
search system, and internal examination systems. These major updates
will provide far-reaching efficiencies for both customers and staff.
The implementation of the regulatory changes to post-registration
responses and extensions cannot be completed until the migration to the
new systems is complete. The USPTO anticipates that this will occur in
the spring or early summer of 2024. The delay will also provide the
public with additional time to prepare for the new response periods.
Delay of this provision to provide prior notice and comment procedures
is also impracticable because it would allow the provisions to go into
effect before the agency is ready to implement the regulatory changes
regarding post-registration responses and extensions.
The Director also finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to
waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness of this rule. Immediate
implementation of the delay in the effective date is in the public
interest because it will provide the agency the ability to effectively
manage and utilize the resources needed to complete all these
initiatives. The delay will also provide the public with additional
time to prepare for the new response periods. Delay of this rule to
provide for the 30-day delay in effectiveness is impracticable because
it would allow the provisions to go into effect before the agency is
ready to implement the regulatory changes regarding post-registration
responses and extensions.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act: As prior notice and an opportunity
for public comment are not required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 or any
other law, neither a Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis nor a
certification under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) is required. See 5 U.S.C. 603.
C. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review): This
rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866 (Sept. 30, 1993).
Katherine K. Vidal,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of
the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2023-19669 Filed 9-11-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P
