
The United States Patent and Trademark Office's (USPTO) new rule requiring foreign-domiciled trademark applicants, registrants, or trademark-proceeding parties to be represented by a U.S. attorney (84 FR 31498) took effect on August 3, 2019. The USPTO issued an accompanying initial Examination Guide in early August to help implement the rule. After taking into account responses to the initial Examination Guide, the USPTO recently revised those guidelines.
Particularly, the revised Examination Guide [link] addresses concerns with language in the initial Examination Guide with respect to determining an applicant's domicile. The initial Examination Guide provided separate sections for determining domiciles for U.S. citizens and foreign citizens. However, the revised Guide does not make this distinction and merely provides for “U.S. Domicile" (no U.S. attorney representation necessary) and "non-U.S. Domicile" (U.S. attorney representation necessary).
Under the heading "Determining Domicile," the initial Guide included language that "[f]oreign citizens must comply with U.S. visa immigration laws to claim the U.S. as their permanent legal residence." Such reference to compliance with "visa immigration laws" and "permanent legal residence" raised concern among trademark examiners who would now potentially be required to ask about an applicant's immigration status.
The revised Examination Guide has eliminated the language regarding complying with "visa immigration laws" and claiming the U.S. as a "permanent legal residence." Rather, the revised Guide provides that if a U.S. street address is listed as the domicile, a foreign applicant need not appoint a U.S. attorney as its representative. While no proof of compliance with visa immigration laws is required, the revised Guide indicates that under some circumstances, such as if the address appears incorrect, the USPTO will require an applicant to provide supporting documentation of its address.
Further, the initial Examination Guide indicated that the use of a P.O. box as a domicile address was prohibited, requiring instead a physical address to make an initial domicile determination. However, concerns were raised that many trademark applicants do not have a business address and would then be forced to provide their home address.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
- Partner
David Jackson provides a full spectrum of intellectual property services and works closely with clients to help them develop comprehensive, global brand strategies. Clients value David’s creativity, strategic judgment, and ability to understand their business needs to help them best ...
- Partner
Oliver is approachable, articulate, and goal-oriented. He helps his clients understand the big picture and then guides them to achieve their objectives.
Oliver Bajracharya is a partner in Lewis Roca's Intellectual Property Practice Group. U.S.-based and international companies turn to ...
About This Blog
Lewis Roca is immersed in your industry and invested in your success. We share insights and trends that can affect your business.
Search
Topics
Archives
- October 2023
- September 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- November 2018
- April 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- April 2016
- January 2016
Authors
- Alfredo T. Alonso
- Amy E. Altshuler
- Oliver S. Bajracharya
- Edwin A. Barkel
- Trevor G. Bartel
- Nick Bauman
- G. Warren Bleeker
- Brooks Brennan
- Ogonna M. Brown
- Chad S. Caby
- John Carson
- Rob Charles
- Joshua T. Chu
- Brent R. Cohen
- Howard E. Cole
- Lance T. Collins
- Ross L. Crown
- Thomas J. Daly
- Pat Derdenger
- Thomas J. Dougherty
- Susan M. Freeman
- Jessica L. Fuller
- Salma G. Granich
- John C. Gray, CIPP/US
- Art Hasan
- Frances J. Haynes
- Dietrich C. Hoefner
- Jennifer K. Hostetler
- David A. Jackson
- Andrew Jacobsohn
- Aaron D. Johnson
- Kyle W. Kellar
- Kris J. Kostolansky
- Gregory S. Lampert
- Shaun P. Lee
- Glenn J. Light
- Laura A. Lo Bianco
- Karen Jurichko Lowell
- James M. Lyons
- H. William Mahaffey
- Constantine Marantidis
- Patrick Emerson McCormick, CIPP/US
- Michael J. McCue
- Lindsay L. McKae
- Linda M. Mitchell
- Gary J. Nelson
- William D. Nelson
- Rachel A. Nicholas
- Laura Pasqualone
- David A. Plumley
- Kurt S. Prange
- Katie M. (Derrig) Rios
- Robert F. Roos
- Karl F. Rutledge
- Daniel A. Salgado
- Mary Ellen Simonson
- Susan Strebel Sperber
- Jan A. Steinhour
- Ryan M. Swank
- Dustin R. Szakalski
- Chris A. Underwood
- Jennifer A. Van Kirk
- Hilary D. Wells
- Drew Wilson
- Karen L. Witt
- Meng Zhong
Recent Posts
- The IP of Everything Podcast - Episode 21 - The IP of Similar Sounding Songs - Part 2
- The IP of Everything Podcast - Episode 20 - The IP of Similar Sounding Songs - Part 1
- Welcome our 2023 Michael D. Nosler Scholarship Intern
- SaaS is Taxable in Arizona Despite No Statutory Authority to Tax Digital Services
- The IP of Everything Podcast - Episode 19 - The IP of The
- The IP of Everything Podcast - Episode 18 - The IP of AI
- Escrow Agent Found 100% Liable for Wire Transfer to Cybercriminal/Imposter
- GAO Sustains Protest Where Awardee's Proposal Allegedly Misrepresented Availability of Key Person
- NCUA Approves 72-Hour Breach Notification Rule
- Welcome our 2023 Diversity Legal Writing Interns