IPfever

Atlanta law firm for global business

Category: Intellectual Property

  • Proximo Spirits, Inc. v. West Road Spirits LLC

    Non-precedential opinion of TTAB for proceeding No. 92080766 in 2025

    A copy of the opinion (downloadable at https://ttab-reading-room.uspto.gov) should be appended to the motion or brief. TBMP §101.03(a)(2).

    (1) Holding The Board denied the Petition to Cancel the registration for the mark SEXTO.

    (2) Procedural History The Petitioner, Proximo Spirits, Inc., sought to cancel the registration for the standard character mark SEXTO for “alcoholic beverages, except beer; alcoholic beverages, namely, distilled agave liquor” in International Class 33.

    The Petitioner’s claim was based on its own registered mark, THE SEXTON (in standard characters), for “whiskey” in International Class 33.

    (4) Issues The central issue was whether there was a likelihood of confusion between Petitioner’s mark THE SEXTON and Respondent’s mark SEXTO, as used on their respective alcoholic beverages.

    (5) Rationales The TTAB denied the petition to cancel based on

    • Goods, Channels of Trade, and Consumers: The Board found the goods to be legally identical because the identification “alcoholic beverages, except beer” includes whiskey. The Board also found that distilled agave liquor and whiskey are closely related, as evidenced by third-party registrations and distillery websites offering both under the same marks. Because the goods are identical or closely related, the Board presumed they are sold in the same trade channels and offered to the same classes of consumers. These factors weighed heavily in favor of a likelihood of confusion.
    • Strength of Petitioner’s Mark: The Board found Petitioner’s mark, THE SEXTON, to be both conceptually and commercially strong. The term “sexton” is arbitrary in connection with whiskey, giving it conceptual strength. The evidence also showed commercial strength through significant sales, promotional expenditures, industry awards, and a co-branding partnership with the television show The Walking Dead. This factor weighed in favor of a likelihood of confusion.
    • Dissimilarity of the Marks: The Board concluded that the marks are dissimilar in their overall commercial impression, particularly in their connotation and meaning.
      • Connotation and Meaning: Petitioner’s mark, THE SEXTON, has a specific meaning in English, referring to a church officer or grave digger. This connotation is reinforced by its promotional activities and the word “THE,” which suggests a specific individual. Respondent’s mark, SEXTO, has no understood meaning in English, and in Spanish, it means “sixth”.
      • Appearance: Although SEXTO is only one letter away from SEXTON, the omission of the “N” is significant because consumers are unlikely to perceive it as a misspelling of SEXTON.
      • Sound: The Board found it unlikely that the marks would be pronounced in a similar way.
    • Dissimilarity outweighed other factors: The Board held that the dissimilarity of the marks outweighed the similarities of the goods, trade channels, and the strength of Petitioner’s mark. The differences were “significant” and “substantial,” justifying a conclusion that confusion is unlikely. The Petition to Cancel was therefore denied.

  • In re Ghostwritten LLC

    Non-precedential opinion of TTAB for proceeding No. 98199104 in 2025

    A copy of the opinion (downloadable at https://ttab-reading-room-aws.uspto.gov/cms/rest/legal-proceeding/97344289/decision/EXA_10.pdf) should be appended to the motion or brief. TBMP §101.03(a)(2).

    (1) Holding

    The Board reversed the refusal to register the mark GHOSTWRITTEN INC. because it was not merely descriptive for the Applicant’s services.

    (2) Mark

    The Applicant, Ghostwritten LLC, sought registration on the Principal Register of the standard-character mark GHOSTWRITTEN INC. for numerous services in International Class 41, some of which could be ghostwritten:

    • Educational and entertainment programs accessible via audio, web-based applications, and computer networks (covering daily life, comedy, pop culture, current events, memes, internet videos, and music).
    • Providing websites featuring blogs, non-downloadable podcasts, and videos in various fields like daily life, entertainment, social issues, music, movies, and celebrity news.
    • Providing information in the fields of entertainment and current events.
    • Digital video, audio, and multimedia publishing services, including e-books and electronic publications.
    • Live musical performances, music production, and music publishing services.
    • Entertainment services in the nature of web series and webcasts.
    • Online databases featuring music.
    • Conducting art exhibitions (including NFT art and virtual exhibitions), custom art drawing/sketching, and providing virtual museum services.
    • Film production and multimedia publishing of various media.
    • Providing online non-downloadable virtual clothing, headwear, footwear, eyewear, fashion bags, games, toys, CDs, and DVDs for use in virtual environments for entertainment purposes.

    (3) Procedural History

    The Examining Attorney refused registration on two grounds:

    • Likelihood of Confusion: With four registered marks: GHOSTWRITER (Class 9 – video/DVDs, TV programs), GHOSTWRYTER (Class 41 – music artist/production/live performances), GHOSTWRITER (Class 9 – audio/video recordings, downloadable publications/content), and GHOSTWRITER (Class 16 – printed materials, Class 41 – TV programs, multimedia programs, online information). This ground was withdrawn in the final office action.
    • Mere Descriptiveness: Arguing that GHOSTWRITTEN INC. is merely descriptive of the services because the Applicant provides services related to creative content that could be produced for another who is the presumed or credited creator. The Examining Attorney provided dictionary definitions for “ghostwritten” and Internet evidence showing its common use in creative industries. In the final action, additional evidence was attached to illustrate that blog posts, website content, e-books, and written information are commonly ghostwritten.

    (4) Issues

    Whether the Examining Attorney carried her burden of proving that GHOSTWRITTEN INC. immediately conveys knowledge about a significant feature of Applicant’s services, thereby being merely descriptive under Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(1).

    (5) Rationales

    The TTAB reversed the refusal based on the following rationales:

    • Vagueness and Amorphousness: The Board found the term GHOSTWRITTEN INC. to be “too amorphous, nebulous and vague” for consumers to immediately understand it as describing a significant feature of the Applicant’s recited services. The leap between the mark and the services’ attributes is not “almost instantaneous”.
    • Lack of Prevalance in Public Perception: The Examining Attorney’s evidence did not demonstrate that the consuming public would instantaneously perceive GHOSTWRITTEN INC. as describing a key attribute of Applicant’s specific services.
    • Applicant’s Intent to be Confirmed by Statement of Use: Applicant explicitly stated that “none of the services listed in the identification of services are intended to be created for another who is the presumed or credited creator or author”.
    • Third-Party Registrations: The Board noted that four similar “GHOSTWRITER” or “GHOSTWRYTER” marks were registered without overcoming Section 2(e)(1) refusals, even though they covered creative works. This indicated that the Office had taken a different position in the past, supporting the idea that the public does not immediately understand “GHOSTWRITTEN” as descriptive of such services.
    • Suggestive, Not Merely Descriptive: The Board concluded that the mark is, “at worst, ‘suggestive of the services in connection with which it is used’”. Given the difficulty in drawing the line between descriptive and suggestive marks, any doubt was resolved in favor of the Applicant, as the Examining Attorney failed to meet the burden of establishing mere descriptiveness.

  • In re EquipKeyCo, LLC

    Non-precedential opinion of TTAB for proceeding No. 97344289 in 2025

    A copy of the opinion (downloadable at https://ttab-reading-room-aws.uspto.gov/cms/rest/legal-proceeding/97344289/decision/EXA_10.pdf) should be appended to the motion or brief. TBMP §101.03(a)(2).

    Holding

    The board affirmed the disclaimer requirement and preemptively reversed the likelihood of confusion.

    Mark

    EquipKeyCo, LLC (“Applicant”) sought to register for “pre-fabricated metal ignition keys for starting heavy equipment, namely construction and agricultural equipment” in International Class 6.

    Procedural history

    Examiner required a disclaimer of the wording “EQUIP KEY CO” within the mark, arguing that it is merely descriptive of the Applicant’s goods because “EQUIP” is a recognized abbreviation for “equipment”, “KEY” directly refers to the goods (keys), and “CO” is a common abbreviation for “company”.

    Examiner also refused the registration based on the likelihood of confusion because the applied-for mark’s wording, which is a dominant feature, consists of only the entire wording of the cited mark plus a descriptive wording.

    Issues

    1. Isa unitary mark with a nondescript meaning?
    2. Is likely to be confused with for “metal, brass and aluminum key blanks; metal and aluminum key chains; metal and brass locks, lock cylinders, pad locks and door locks” in Class 6?

    Rationales

    1. Finding the wording Equip Key Co is descriptive, the board noted that the composite mark did not create a unitary mark with a non-descriptive meaning because of the capitalization and coloring. The design elements were deemed irrelevant to the descriptiveness of the wording itself.
    2. The Board found similarity in goods and shared channels, and it doubted the equipment purchasers, however sophisticated, would exercise the same degree of care for small, inexpensive items like keys. Nevertheless, the board found that the words Key and Co were conceptually weak and highly suggestive in connection with keys and key-related goods so as to the difference in design portions was sufficient to avoid confusion. See In re Bed & Breakfast Registry, 791 F.2d 157, 159 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Hartz Hotel Servs., Inc., 102 USPQ2d 1150, 1154 (TTAB 2011).
  • How to DIY: USPTO trademark registration

    How to DIY: USPTO trademark registration

    The United States Patent and Trademark Office, the government agency responsible for trademark registrations, provides up-to-date, comprehensive guides and toolkits:

    Trademark basics | USPTO

    It’s important to note that the USPTO is a SELF-FUNDED AGENCY.

    This means they are incentivized to make every effort to help you through the application process. Well, it’s in their self-interest because they charge a flat fee for examining your application; poorly prepared applications cost them more time and resource.

    Please do not ignore what they say “basics”. They are basics in the sense that you MUST KNOW THEM before applying for registration. It’s your first step toward legally securing one of your most valuable assets, your brands.

    More helpful reads

  • 2-min guide to IPs for retail business

    2-min guide to IPs for retail business

    Let’s say you were to sell t-shirts.

    What do you want to protect?

    A. Words, logos, etc

    B. Product design

    C. It’s all in the making. (e.g. special sewing technique)

    A. Words, logos, etc

    These are called “trademarks”. Trademark is a way to tell people that products bearing the “words, logos, etc” are from you.

    Once you register your trademark with the USPTO, you put everyone in the U.S. on the notice that you own the trademark.

    This makes it easier for you to stop others from selling fake goods/services that pose to be yours.

    Average client spends about $710 including all government fees and other expenses to get a trademark registered.

    The amount is based on actual billing data for IPfever clients’ trademarks that are registered in the past two years as of writing this article.

    B. Product design

    You can get “design patent” for the ornamental feature, like the wing-shaped sleeves.

    Once you patent the design, you get a legally sanctioned monopoly for the design in the U.S. for more than a decade.

    Getting a design patent can be a tedious and expensive process. However, for industrial design, it’s often the only option.

    Average client spends about $4,020 including all government fees and other expenses to get a design patent.

    The amount is based on actual billing data for IPfever clients’ design patents that are issued in the past five years as of writing this article.

    C. It’s all in the making.

    Manufacturing techniques,

    special treatments,

    textile printing method,

    special construction,

    and more

    When people say “patent”, they mean “utility patent”.

    If you developed a new product, it’s likely you invented something. In other words, unless you copied someone else’s goods/services without a single improvement, there is something you can patent.

    Nevertheless, it is important to understand that patent doesn’t protect a product as a whole. It rather protects a specific feature of the product. Sometimes, the patented feature is so minor that others can outcompete you without it, making the patent useless.

    Average client spends about $7,600 including all government fees and other expenses to get a utility patent.

    The amount is based on actual billing data for IPfever clients’ design patents that are issued in the past five years as of writing this article.

    Of course, there are more ways to protect your IP, but the above three should give you a head start.

  • Can I get it patented?

    When you ask,

    Can I get my product patented?

    The answer goes:

    it definitely is, but it might not worth it.

    Let me explain.

    Some people mistake a patent as a comprehensive protection for a certain idea or product. Well, a smartphone is said to be covered by 250,000 patents. It should tell you how narrow a patent can be.

    Does that mean it is easy to get patent?

    For a surprise to someone, the answer is “yes,” but I didn’t say it’s cheap.

    For a product development, creative steps are essential even if you are imitating another product. You don’t know how they built it, so you re-create the manufacturing steps after reverse-engineering. In so doing, you’ll have to go through trials and errors, and then you end up with a better, or sometimes worse, article.

    Well, if the difference is on the better side, you might want to get it patented. Even if it’s on the worse side, you can still get a patent. I know it goes against your intuition, but legally speaking, “utility” means that it has a use, not necessarily a beneficial one.

    So, a minor tweak in manufacturing process and a tiny new feature in your product can be patented.

    Why then, do people speak so highly of patent?

    To get a patent, you will need help from patent professionals. And they are expensive.

    While it is easy to say that patent grants you exclusive rights in certain steps or features, disputes regarding the steps and features will be always very technical and to the minute details.

    A patent has to be very clear as to what extent the patent owner has exclusive rights. And for that, patent law has developed in a way that having a law degree will not quite make you cut out to be a patent practitioner. An attorney with an engineering degree can sit for a patent bar administered by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, which has notoriously low pass rates. The result: it costs many thousands, even up to hundreds of thousands, of dollars to secure a patent.

    It is not to say there is always positive correlation between cost and value. But, in reality, you wouldn’t invest in something unless it justifies the cost. Issued patents are there because at least someone believed the value would exceed the cost.

    How do you measure the value of a patent?

    There are many factors including the size of potential market and consumer demand, but most patent professionals agree that it essentially depends on how difficult it is to “design around.”

    Let’s say you make a new product that goes viral. Consumer demand skyrockets, and you have legally sanctioned monopoly, assuming you got the patent. Your competitors would look at your product, and the first thing they would think about is how to make a similar item that is not infringing your patent right.

    We call it designing around a patent. If your competitors can easily design around your patent, the value of your patent is, of course, not so much.

    Patent practitioner tries to make your patent hard to design around.

    To get a patent, you will need to explain your tech to the extent anyone has ordinary skill in the art can reproduce the tech. Further, you will need to claim what exactly is the scope of your patent right.

    The scope sets the boundary of your patent right, so it tells others if their products would infringe your patent. Further, others will try to find out if they could design around your patent.

    It is a critical aspect of patent prosecution because you, as an inventor, can claim the boundary of patent right.

    Of course, you have to persuade the USPTO, or the patent examiner, that your claim is not overreaching. Overreaching patent scope might unjustifiably call a common practice in the industry patent infringement. So, when you claim broadly, the USPTO will be reluctant to grant a patent.

    Last words

    So, the real question is if your invention would make a “good” patent that is worth of your money.

  • Trademark DIY – ICs and IDs?

    Trademark DIY – ICs and IDs?

    When you go through a TEAS application, you will be required to assign an acceptable identification of goods/services for your trademark. In doing so, you will be (sometimes unknowingly) assigning an international class as well. Find out what are these and how to choose them.

    International Classes & Acceptable Identifications of Goods or Services

    These are two separate systems of categorizing goods and services. As you probably know by now, a trademark (or servicemark) cannot exist without an associated good or service. In other words, you cannot claim a phrase like “Your Favorite Snarky Joe” alone as a trademark. When you make and sell t-shirts printed with the wording “Your Favorite Snarky Joe”, you can stop others from selling T-shirts with the same print. That’s how trademark works.

    Naturally, when you file a trademark application (or TEAS) for your brand with the USPTO, you need to provide a list of goods/services your brand sells/offers (or plan to do so) in the U.S. market. An option is to search something called “ID Manual” that has a list of goods/services. For your information, they are called “acceptable identification” because they are pre-approved for use in trademark registration. In fact, you are required to choose exclusively from the ID Manual if you want to qualify for TEAS plus, which is at least $50 cheaper to file.

    It’s “at least” $50 cheaper because application fees are calculated based on how many International Classes you have. In the ID Manual, you will see a three-digit number with a heading “Class” next to each item. That’s short for International Class, and it’s international because representatives of many countries met in Nice and agreed to have a common classification system for trademark. There are only 45 Classes, each encompassing a wide range of goods or services. For example, Class 1 includes various chemicals for industrial and commercial purposes such as

    • sensitized paper;
    • tyre repairing compositions;
    • salt for preserving, other than for foodstuffs;
    • certain additives for use in the food industry, for example, pectin, lecithin, enzymes and chemical preservatives;
    • certain ingredients for use in the manufacture of cosmetics and pharmaceuticals, for example, vitamins, preservatives and antioxidants;
    • certain filtering materials, for example, mineral substances, vegetable substances and ceramic materials in particulate form.
    Explanatory Note for Class 1 in Nice Classification

    In many cases, all of goods/services you sell/offer will belong to a single Class. If that’s the case, it does not matter how many goods/services you include in your application. The application fee stays the same. However, if your goods/services span over two Classes, you will pay double the application fee (which is $250 as of 2022). Three Classes, then triple the amount. If you cannot find a suitable description of your good/service in the ID Manual for your goods/services, you will have to opt out of TEAS plus and simply type up a description in your own words. For the $50 extra fee, the USPTO will examine whether it’s an acceptable identification or not.

    Which is better: Over- or under-inclusive of goods/services?

    If you are already selling/offering the goods/services in the U.S. market, obviously there is no reason to be over-inclusive. To include goods/service planned for future, you will have to file a separate intent-to-use (“ITU”) application for those items. But if you are filing for a trademark that is not currently in use in the U.S. (i.e. filing an ITU application), it may be tempting for you to include as many goods/services as possible. As long as they all belong to a Class, you pay the same, right?

    You should not include more than those you firmly plan to sell or offer in the U.S. because you are required to prove that you are currently selling or offering all goods/services listed in your registration at all times. To explain further, although you only need to submit a single specimen for an entire Class in your application and most likely throughout the registration process, the USPTO can always ask for more later. In fact, they do periodical audits to carve out trademarks that are no longer in use.

    On the other hand, when your goods/services span over multiple Classes, you might consider going under-inclusive. Many trademark DIY-ers have a tight budget, and application fees are the ultimate cost for them. So, having multiple Classes may need to be avoided at all costs. In this case, you should focus on your core business. The USPTO will almost always first reject an application if they find a registration with a similar trademark in the same Class. In terms of fending off your competitors, you should have your trademark registered in Classes where your competition happens.

    If you’re worried that your competitors may have a similar or same trademark registered in a Class potentially competing with your interest in the future, you can either file an intent-to-use application preemptively or monitor USPTO Official Gazette that publish trademarks to be registered if not opposed. Filing a preemptive application will only work for a period of time because you will be required to submit proof of use within 6 months (can be extended up to 3 years) after the examination of the application is completed. And there are professional Gazette monitoring services, which can be highly efficient if you have a large trademark portfolio.

    Although Classes and IDs are made by the USPTO for administrative purpose, they often make big differences in real-life outcomes and affect your legal rights in terms of enforcing your trademark right. Do spend time and double-check if you’re in doubt.

  • Somebody’s claiming rights under trademark registration, which you believe is bogus?

    Somebody’s claiming rights under trademark registration, which you believe is bogus?

    You may be able to move the USPTO to expunge or cancel a trademark registration for not being commercially used in the U.S.

    What is Expungement (and Reexamination) of Trademark Registration?

    Virtually anyone can petition for an expungement of a registered trademark with the evidence of record supporting that the registered mark has never been used in commerce on or in connection with some or all of the goods and/or services recited in the registration.

    Similarly, for registered marks that were not used at the time of filing or by the time provided for statement of alleged use, a petition for a reexamination can be filed with the corresponding evidence.

    Either one is an ex parte proceeding before the USPTO, meaning once you establish that there is a prima facie case of non-use (see below), the registrant will need to prove otherwise.

    Eligible period?

    The registration should be in between 3 and 10 years from the date of registration. However, till December 27, 2023, you can file for an expungement proceeding for a registration that is at least 3 years old, regardless of the 10-year limit.

    What is a prima facie case?

    It’s a legal term of art that requires a working knowledge regarding burden of proof in a legal proceeding. The more important thing is how to establish a prima facie case.

    When you file a petition for an expungement or reexamination you must include evidence as follows:

    a. The elements of the reasonable investigation of nonuse conducted, as defined under § 2.91(d), where for each source of information relied upon, the statement includes a description of how and when the searches were conducted and what the searches disclosed; and

    b. A concise factual statement of the relevant basis for the petition, including any additional facts that support the allegation of nonuse of the mark in commerce on or in connection with the goods and services as specified in § 2.91(a);

    • A clear and legible copy of all documentary evidence supporting a prima facie case of nonuse of the mark in commerce and an itemized index of such evidence.

    What can be used as evidence?

    As set forth in § 2.91(d)(2), appropriate sources of evidence and information for a reasonable investigation may include, but are not limited to:

    • State and Federal trademark records;
    • internet websites and other media likely to or believed to be owned or controlled by the registrant;
    • internet websites, other online media, and publications where the relevant goods and/or services likely would be advertised or offered for sale;
    • Print sources and web pages likely to contain reviews or discussions of the relevant goods and/or services;

    • Records of filings made with or of actions taken by any State or Federal business registration or regulatory agency;

    • The registrant’s marketplace activities, including, for example, any attempts to contact the registrant or purchase the relevant goods and/or services;
    • Records of litigation or administrative proceedings reasonably likely to contain evidence bearing on the registrant’s use or nonuse of the registered mark; and
    • Any other reasonably accessible source with information establishing that the mark was never in use in commerce (expungement), or was not in use in commerce as of the relevant date (reexamination), on or in connection with the relevant goods and/or services.

    Notes

    If you find a trademark registration that blocks your trademark’s registration or simply in the way of your commercial utilization of the trademark, it is definitely worth a look to see if the registration was legitimate and valid.

    Also, the ex parte proceedings can be an effective way to respond to any claims against your trademark use or application based on a previous trademark registration, including a letter of protest, a TTAB opposition proceeding, and other legal disputes. The ex parte proceedings will suspend any actions before the USPTO and the TTAB.

  • The Story of DASAMOA®

    The Story of DASAMOA®

    “The Story of” series of articles are written by Young Jeon, Esq. to share his experience with a trademark application filed with the USPTO. It is intended to be informative as to the USPTO trademark registration process. Only information readily available to the public is contained in this article.

    DASAMOA® is an online retail department store based in Texas.

    I particularly remember this case for taking only three days to file. That means I spent only three days on reviewing, preparing, and filing the application. One might say, “Three days? I can do it in 20 minutes.”

    What needs to be done?

    When you have a totally arbitrary standard character mark, such as “QEGIX”, you often find no similar mark used for related goods or services. Also, when the mark is currently used for a good and you can personally verify the use, you can move pretty quickly.

    However, even in those cases, it typically takes more than a week due to things like executing a retainer agreement, following up with the clients, and so on.

    What’s arbitrary?

    A mark is arbitrary when it does not have any pertinence to the good or service with which it is associated. I used QEGIX as an example above because it is probably not pertinent to any good or service. However, even a common word like Apple can be arbitrary when it is used in association with electronics and computers.

    What’s “current used for”?

    Before registration, a trademark must be used, and a mark is used when goods bearing the mark are sold in the United States. Technically, the marked goods have to move across the state borders, but in today’s world it’s rather hard to find a good that is made and sold within a single state.

    Why verify?

    I work with diverse clients with different backgrounds. A lot of businesses are based in a country that has a different trademark registration scheme than the U.S. system. In fact, in many countries one can simply file for a trademark regardless of the “use” requirement. Hence, I make sure if they are using the mark correctly among others before filing an application.

    Notes

    • For a service, the “use” requirement is satisfied when a service is offered.
    • I could verify the existence of Dasamoa, LLC in the state of Texas via Taxable Entity Search (state.tx.us).
    • A web page can be used as a specimen for both goods and services. However, you will need to include the web address and the date on which you produced the screenshot in your application.

    Timeline

    10/26/2020: Initial consultation
    10/28/2020: Application filed
    4/5/2021: Office action*
    4/5/2021: Response to the OA
    8/10/2021: Published for opposition
    10/26/2021: Registered

    *A clerical error caused an office action to be issued. It was resolved without additional charges to the client.

  • Not sure if you have a registered trademark?

    Not sure if you have a registered trademark?

    There are many business owners who own registered trademarks but have no idea about it. How come?

    Possible scenarios:

    1. You’ve registered a trademark when you started up, and you never looked back.
    2. You thought having your business/brand name registered was a good idea one day, then you managed to get it registered. And now it feels like an ancient history.
    3. You hired someone for your trademark registration, and you don’t know where to find them now.

    Well, here comes what to do when that happens.

    First, see if you have “U.S. Serial No.” or “Registration No.” in your hands.

    If you have any of the following, you can find the number easily:

    1. Registration Certificate (for your trademark)
    2. USPTO Official Receipt (for your trademark application)
    3. An email from the USPTO regarding your application or registration

    If you don’t have any of those, you need to go to TESS and look up your trademark. See generally TESS Search Hacks.

    Second, you go to TSDR and access the current status of your application/registration.

    Just type the number you have in the box, and hit Status.

    If it reads “Registered” on your status as highlighted below, you have a registered trademark.

    If you don’t have a registered trademark, it’s obvious that you need to do something about it.

    However, even if you have a registered mark that’s issued and active, you might still need to something.

    Lastly, click Maintenance tab on the top.

    Then, you’ll see something like this.

    It will tell you if your maintenance is due. In other words, if you don’t act in time, your trademark registration will be canceled.

    Well, losing registration doesn’t mean you lose your trademark altogether. In some cases, you can even revive your registration. However, there will be at least a suspension of your statutory rights under the registration, so you do not want that to happen.

    If you didn’t do your application yourself, you may need help with maintenance as well, but not always.

    Maintenance chiefly comes in two varieties: (1) making sure the registrant is still using the mark and (2) impose reasonable fees for keeping the trademark Registers. The latter is, as you probably guessed, about paying the bill while the former requires some documentation to prove your use.

    Let’s talk about the former variety. This type of maintenance filing is often rejected for submitting a wrong specimen. So, you probably should check out Specimens | USPTO before filing.

    Other than that, I believe the maintenance filing is pretty straightforward as long as you read and follow instruction carefully. Just make sure you find a correct form on the Index of all TEAS forms | USPTO.

    Good luck!