米国 商標近代化法(Trademark Modernization Act of 2020)

米国・商標近代化法とその内容

商標近代化法(“Trademark Modernization Act of 2020”)は2020年12月27日に立法化され、2021年12月27日に施行予定です。不使用の商標を登録から外すための、第3者の情報提供制度、査定系抹消手続(Ex Parte Expungement)と査定系再審査手続(Ex Parte Reexamination)が新たに制度化され、また、商標権侵害について反論できる回復不能な損害(rebuttable presumption of irreparable harm)が生じていると見なすこと、さらに柔軟な拒絶理由通知(Office Action)の応答期間についても規定されています。
halfmoon bay
続きを読む“米国 商標近代化法(Trademark Modernization Act of 2020)”

商標登録insideNews: New Trademark Cancellation Procedures Established | National Law Review

On December 27, 2020, the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (“the Act”) became law as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021. Among other changes, the Act includes important amendments to the Lanham Act:Establishes two new ex parte proceedings to cancel unused marks;Creates a uniform rule establishing a rebuttable presumption of irreparable harm for trademark infringement;Formalizes the procedure for Letters of Protest; andPermits the examiner to set shorter response times for office actions.

情報源: New Trademark Cancellation Procedures Established

【法改正】Trademark Modernization Act(商標近代化法、TMA)により不使用を理由とする査定系抹消手続(Ex Parte Expungement)と査定系再審査手続(Ex Parte Reexamination)が新たに制度化されており、その施行日は2021年12月27日に決められています。また、商標権侵害があれば、それは反論できるものの回復不能な損害(rebuttable presumption of irreparable harm)が生じていると見なすものとなります。この推定規定から侵害での商標権者の挙証負担が軽減されます。また、拒絶理由通知(Office Action)の応答期間が6ヶ月から60日乃至6ヶ月と短く柔軟な期間を審査官が設定することができ、出願人側で6ヶ月とするには手数料がかかります。

米国特許商標庁/USPTO Alexandria Virgina, USA

商標登録insideNews: Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 | Lathrop GPM – JDSupra
商標登録insideNews: Trademark Modernisation Act introduced in bid to combat fraudulent filings: reaction | World Trademark Review

商標登録insideNews: Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 | Lathrop GPM – JDSupra

Congress has just passed the bi-partisan Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (TMA), which amends the Trademark Act to provide new procedures for third-party submission of evidence relating to trademark applications, to establish ex parte proceedings for reexamination and expungement of outstanding trademark registrations, and to provide for a rebuttable presumption of irreparable harm in trademark infringement proceedings.

情報源: Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 | Lathrop GPM – JDSupra

On December 22, 2020, Congress passed the content of a pending bill, H.R. 6196, the “Trademark Modernization Act of 2020,” as part of its year-end virus relief and spending package. Among other things, the Act seeks to create more efficient processes to challenge registrations that are not being used in commerce, including by establishing new ex parte proceedings. The Act also seeks to unify the standard for irreparable harm with respect to injunctions in trademark cases, in light of inconsistencies that have emerged across federal courts after the Supreme Court’s decision in eBay v. MercExchange, LLC, 547 U.S. 388 (2006).

情報源: Gibson Dunn

H.R.6196 — 116th Congress (2019-2020)
商標近代化法(TMA)は商標出願に関連する証拠を第三者が提出するための新しい手順を提供し、未処理の商標の再審査と抹消のための査定系手続きを確立します。米国商標制度における言わば情報提供制度のように思われます。

On December 27, 2020, the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (“TMA”) became law after it passed Congress and was signed by the President as part of the year-end Consolidated Appropriations Act for 2021.1 The TMA, which will become effective one year after its signature into law, introduces significant amendments to the Lanham Act2 designed to modernize trademark examination procedures and combat the increasing numbers of trademark registrations covering marks not used in commerce.

情報源: Trademark Modernization Act Becomes Law: Establishes New Procedures to Remove Deadwood Registrations, Restores Presumption of Irreparable Harm, and Protects the Independence of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board | Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP – JDSupra

Summary of H.R.6196
This bill makes several changes to trademark law, such as by providing new mechanisms for opposing and canceling trademark registrations at the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) and by making it easier to secure an injunction.

The bill authorizes a third party to submit evidence to the PTO to oppose an application for a federal trademark registration.

The bill establishes a procedure for any party to petition the PTO to expunge a registration for a trademark that has not been used in commerce. The bill also establishes a procedure for any party to petition the PTO to reexamine any trademark registration on such nonuse grounds.

The PTO may also initiate such an expungement or reexamination proceeding.

If a plaintiff has prevailed in court in asserting certain trademark rights, that plaintiff shall be entitled to a presumption that the plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm for purposes of determining whether the plaintiff is entitled to a permanent injunction. If a trademark plaintiff is seeking a preliminary injunction, that plaintiff is entitled to this presumption upon a court finding that the plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits of the case. Under current law, a plaintiff must establish irreparable harm to secure an injunction.

In addition, the PTO Director shall have the authority to reconsider, modify, or set aside certain decisions made by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

The Government Accountability Office shall report to Congress on PTO efforts to address false and inaccurate claims in trademark registrations and applications.

商標登録insideNews: Cisco Files Trademark Opposition Against Omcisco, Citing Confusion and Dilution | Law Street Media

On Wednesday, opposer Cisco Technology, Inc. filed a notice of opposition before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board against applicant Omcisco Technology INC.’s application for the OMCISCO mark, citing likelihood of consumer confusion and dilution of its famous mark.

情報源: Cisco Files Trademark Opposition Against Omcisco, Citing Confusion and Dilution – Tech

Opposition
Number: 91266568
Filing Date: 12/16/2020
Status: Pending
Status Date: 12/16/2020
Plaintiff Name: Cisco Technology, Inc
Defendant Name: Omcisco Technology INC.

商標登録insideNews: Substantial Increase in US Trademark Fees Will Ring in New Year 2021 | McCarter & English, LLP

If you are considering filing a new trademark application or maintaining an existing registration, you may want to file your submission before the end of 2020. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will increase its fees for trademark applications, post-registration maintenance filings, and certain filings with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB).Continue Reading

情報源: Substantial Increase in US Trademark Fees Will Ring in New Year 2021 | McCarter & English, LLP

[コメント]2021年1月2日からの米国商標出願のオフィシャルフィーの値上げが予定されています。主な値上げの項目では、出願料ついては、スタンダード350ドル(1区分当たり:値上げ幅75ドル)、プラスが250ドル(1区分当たり:値上げ幅25ドル)です。また、5-6年目や更新時の使用宣誓書の提出は225ドル(値上げ幅125ドル)になります。それら使用宣誓書の提出前の商品削除補正は無料ですが、提出後では補正が1区分当たり250ドルになります。抜き打ち検査(audit)に引っ掛かって、使用していない商品の証拠提出を求められた場合、区分当たり250ドルの補正料は払うか登録を断念するかの選択になりそうです。マドプロベースの出願料も500ドルになっており、マドプロの米国指定の費用も値上がりが予想されます。

The United States Patent and Trademark Office recently enacted a rule that increases numerous fees for filing trademark applications, maintaining…

情報源: Time is of the essence to avoid trademark fee increases set for 2021 – Lexology

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 222 / Tuesday, November 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
PART 2—RULES OF PRACTICE IN
TRADEMARK CASES
■ 1. The authority citation for part 2 is
revised to read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1113, 1123; 35 U.S.C.
2; sec. 10, Pub. L. 112–29, 125 Stat. 284,
unless otherwise noted. Sec. 2.99 also issued
under secs. 16, 17, 60 Stat. 434; 15 U.S.C.
1066, 1067.
■ 2. Amend § 2.6 by:
■ a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i)
through (v);
■ b. Adding paragraph (a)(11)(iii);
■ c. Revising paragraphs (a)(12), (15)
through (18), (22), and (23); and
■ d. Adding paragraphs (a)(24) and (25).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
§ 2.6 Trademark fees.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) For filing an application on paper,
per class—$750.00
(ii) For filing an application under
section 66(a) of the Act, per class—
$500.00
(iii) For filing a TEAS Standard
application, per class—$350.00
(iv) For filing a TEAS Plus application
under § 2.22, per class—$250.00
(v) Additional processing fee under
§ 2.22(c), per class—$100.00
* * * * *
(11) * * *
(iii) For filing an amendment to a
registration prior to submission of an
affidavit under section 8 or section 71
of the Act and consisting only of the
deletion of goods, services, and/or
classes—$0.00
(12) Affidavit under section 8. (i) For
filing an affidavit under section 8 of the
Act on paper, per class—$325.00
(ii) For filing an affidavit under
section 8 of the Act through TEAS, per
class—$225.00
(iii) For deleting goods, services, and/
or classes after submission and prior to
acceptance of an affidavit under section
8 of the Act on paper, per class—
$350.00
(iv) For deleting goods, services, and/
or classes after submission and prior to
acceptance of an affidavit under section
8 of the Act through TEAS, per class—
$250.00
* * * * *
(15) Petitions to the Director. (i) For
filing a petition under § 2.146 or § 2.147
on paper—$350.00
(ii) For filing a petition under § 2.146
or § 2.147 through TEAS—$250.00
(iii) For filing a petition under § 2.66
on paper—$250.00
(iv) For filing a petition under § 2.66
through TEAS—$150.00
(16) Petition to cancel. (i) For filing a
petition to cancel on paper, per class—
$700.00
(ii) For filing a petition to cancel
through ESTTA, per class—$600.00
(17) Notice of opposition. (i) For filing
a notice of opposition on paper, per
class—$700.00
(ii) For filing a notice of opposition
through ESTTA, per class—$600.00
(18) Ex parte appeal. (i) For filing an
ex parte appeal to the Trademark Trial
and Appeal Board on paper, per class—
$325.00
(ii) For filing an ex parte appeal to the
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
through ESTTA, per class—$225.00
(iii) For filing a first request for an
extension of time to file an appeal brief,
per application—$0.00
(iv) For filing a second or subsequent
request for an extension of time to file
an appeal brief on paper, per
application—$200.00
(v) For filing a second or subsequent
request for an extension of time to file
an appeal brief through ESTTA, per
application—$100.00
(vi) For filing an appeal brief on
paper, per class—$300.00
(vii) For filing an appeal brief through
ESTTA, per class—$200.00
* * * * *
(22) Extension of time for filing a
notice of opposition under
§ 2.102(c)(1)(ii) or (c)(2). (i) For filing a
request for an extension of time to file
a notice of opposition under
§ 2.102(c)(1)(ii) or (c)(2) on paper—
$400.00
(ii) For filing a request for an
extension of time to file a notice of
opposition under § 2.102(c)(1)(ii) or
(c)(2) through ESTTA—$200.00
(23) Extension of time for filing a
notice of opposition under § 2.102(c)(3).
(i) For filing a request for an extension
of time to file a notice of opposition
under § 2.102(c)(3) on paper—$500.00
(ii) For filing a request for an
extension of time to file a notice of
opposition under § 2.102(c)(3) through
ESTTA—$400.00
(24) Oral hearing. For filing a request
for an oral hearing before the Trademark
Trial and Appeal Board, per
proceeding—$500.00
(25) Letter of protest. For filing a letter
of protest, per subject application—
$50.00
* * * * *

商標登録insideNews: USPTO Updates Examination Guide for Proof of Trademark Use | Seyfarth Shaw LLP – JDSupra

As we reported in November 2019, the USPTO has been making significant revisions to its rules to combat an influx of fraudulent trademark filings. Some of the biggest rule changes last year were to specimen requirements. The USPTO required that screenshots of websites needed to show the full URL and date, and that product packaging needed to be accompanied by an image or description of the product. In other words, hangtags by themselves or empty boxes were no longer acceptable.

情報源: USPTO Updates Examination Guide for Proof of Trademark Use | Seyfarth Shaw LLP – JDSupra

USPTO Examination Guide 3-19