Specimens for Trademark and Service Mark Applications

One requirement for federal registration of a trademark in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is that the trademark application shows proof that the applicant is using the trademark (or service mark) in commerce in connection with the applicant’s goods or services. For US applications, this proof is in the form of a specimen submitted to show use.[1] Specimens for trademark applications may differ from specimens for service mark applications, but all specimens must show the trademark or service mark as it is applied for associated with the goods/services for which registration is sought.

Specimen for a Service Mark Application

A specimen to show use for a service mark shows the service mark used in marketing or advertising of the applicant’s services.  An acceptable specimen for a service mark application may include online marketing, such as a screenshot of the applicant’s website, a screenshot of posts on the applicant’s social media account, or screenshots of online advertising.  Other examples of acceptable specimens for services are a photograph of a business card or an invoice.  The important thing to remember is that the service mark has to associated with the applicant’s services and must be used in context as a service mark.

One common occurrence that can result in a service mark specimen being refused is that the service mark is used in a sentence. Consider these two examples:

“Camuti Law Group is an outstanding trademark firm that provides outstanding service and advice. Yes, you may find online vendors that cost less. They may have a lower price, but at what cost? The trademark attorneys at Camuti Law Group can help you navigate the particularities of the trademark system with ease.”

Compared to the sample online advertisement:

Lower price, But at what cost

The former is likely to be refused because the slogan, “They may have a lower price. But at what cost?” is included in a sentence and does not stand out as a source idetifier for Camuti Law Group APC. Use of the service mark in a sentence means that a consumer is less likely to recognize the service mark as a slogan and is less likely to associate the service mark with the service provider.

Specimen for a Trademark Application

An acceptable specimen showing use of a trademark in commerce shows the mark associated with the goods that are offered for sale.

One common mistake made in filing a specimen for goods is use of a specimen showing the mark in a decorative or ornamental way.  To avoid this mistake, a trademark applicant should select a specimen that shows the trademark in the branding of the e-commerce website the products and purchasing information, such as a shopping cart.

Examples of acceptable specimens described by the Unite States Patent and Trademark Office in the Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (TMEP) include:

Sample Trademark Specimen

Sample Trademark Specimen

Sample Trademark Specimen

Of course, these are merely examples of acceptable trademark specimens. Other specimens may be acceptable. The USPTO allows photographs, screen shots, and even sound recordings to be used as trademark specimens as appropriate for different trademark applications.

If you have questions about an acceptable specimen for a trademark application or service mark application, call to speak with one of our trademark attorneys.  We look forward to hearing from you soon!

[1] Applications claiming priority to a foreign application or registration, and applications under the Madrid protocol, may not require a specimen.

Trademark applications now require US attorneys for all foreign applicants

Effective August 3, 2019, The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) enacted a new rule requiring all foreign-domiciled trademark applicants, registrants, and parties to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board proceedings to be represented by an attorney who is licensed to practice law in the United States. A foreign-domiciled trademark applicant, registrant, or party – one whose permanent legal residence or principal place of business lies outside of the United States – is now required to have an attorney, licensed in the United States, to represent them in regards to any and all trademark matters.

Further, all licensed U.S. attorneys representing any trademark applicants, registrants, or parties before the USPTO, regardless of their clients’ domicile, are now required to provide additional information regarding their license (i.e. Bar Member Number and State and Year of Admission to the Bar) and to confirm they are an active member in good standing of their bar.

Practically speaking, this means that all applicants located outside of the United States are have to have a U.S. attorney represent them in their trademark applications. Domestic applicants will still be permitted to file their own trademark applications, if they so chose. Further, for both U.S. and foreign applicants, additional attorney information is required. However, the new requirements are minimal and will not substantially change the application or registration process.

In-n-Out sues Puma for trademark infringement.

In an effort to supersize their sales, shoe maker Puma made a whopper of a mistake with their Cali-0 Drive Thru shoes. Of course, there is the possibility that this was just a marketing plan to get some free media coverage.

The So-Cal favorite burger chain collaborated with a Los Angeles-based designer in making the red, white, and yellow shoe. The colors may sound innocent enough, but when combined with the palm tree shoelaces available in certain versions of the show, the burger chain claims that the shoes amount to trademark infringement.

While I would have loved to read this decision, with the inevitable references to secret menu items, such as triple-triple damages, I have a feeling this case will be settled long before trial.

If you have questions about trademark registration or infringement, give us a call!


Things to be aware of after your trademark application has been allowed.

It is a wonderful event when you find out your trademark application has been approved by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), but there are things you should be aware of before (and after!) your trademark is allowed and registers.

Once your mark is approved for registration (sometimes even before the mark is registered!), you are likely to receive many offers and notices from third-party companies.  BEWARE!!!  Many of these offers or notices will tell you that they will protect your mark, for a fee.  If you have an attorney, you should contact her/him before agreeing to any of these services and before paying any fees, they are probably unnecessary, and may be a scam.  If you don’t have an attorney, be cautious before responding to any communication that is not from the USPTO.  A few things you can check to see if the communication is from the USPTO:

  • If it is by mail, make sure it is from the “United States Patent and Trademark Office” in Alexandria, VA;
  • If it is by email, make sure it is from an “@uspto.gov” email address. Beware that some incoming emails are fakes to appear to originate from a certain domain, but the “reply to” address will be to a different domain.
  • If you receive any communications you are unsure about, PLEASE REACH OUT TO ONE OF OUR EXPERIENCED TRADEMARK ATTORNEYS!

After your trademark application has matured into a registered trademark, you can (and should) begin marking your trademark using the words “Registered in U.S. Patent and Trademark Office” or “Reg. U.S. Pat. & Tm. Off.” or the circle-R (®).  This helps to notify others that your mark is registered and may allow you to seek certain types of damages in a trademark infringement suit, if that ever becomes necessary.

You should also make a reasonable effort to determine whether third parties are using your trademark (or a trademark that is confusingly similar to yours) in connection with similar goods or services. When appropriate, you may wish to contact us so we can discuss preparing a demand letter or other steps necessary to prevent a third party from infringing upon your trademark.

PLEASE NOTE: this post is intended for informational purposes and IS NOT legal advice.  If you have legal questions or are seeking legal advice, please contact an attorney.


Trademark registration for cannabis and cannabis-based products

With the recent trend in states allowing adult-use and medical marijuana, even while marijuana, or as it is increasingly known, cannabis, is still illegal federally, many new legitimate businesses face the question of whether they can trademark their names and logos.  The answer is no … and yes.  Understanding this dichotomy involves unpacking trademark law a bit.

First, a trademark is words, graphics, or combination of words and graphics that identify the source of goods provided.  State governments and the federal government each provide registration of trademarks.   I will limit my discussion of state trademark law to that of California.

To register a trademark in California or federally, in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the mark must meet certain criteria.  One of those criteria is that the trademark must be used lawfully in commerce.  This means that marks for marijuana are ineligible for federal registration because marijuana is still included in the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).  Under the CSA, it is unlawful to sell, offer for sale, or use any facility of interstate commerce to transport drug paraphernalia, i.e., “any equipment, product, or material of any kind which is primarily intended or designed for use in manufacturing, compounding, converting, concealing, producing, processing, preparing, injecting, ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing into the human body a controlled substance, possession of which is unlawful under the CSA.”  Some brands opt to register their marks for ancillary goods or services that do not violate the CSA.

However, California is among the states that allow medicinal and adult use of marijuana.  On January 1, 2018, California began registering cannabis-related trademarks, as long as the mark is lawfully in use in commerce within California and the classification of the goods that is used by the USPTO.  As a result, California will register some marks that cannot be registered federally, because adult-use marijuana is legal in California but is still unlawful under federal law.  However, this does not mean that California will register all marijuana related marks.  There are some products that do not fall within the classification system use by the USPTO so they cannot be registered, even though their use in commerce may be allowed in California.

One ingredient that is of particular interest is cannabidiol (CBD).  Many products made with CBD do not have a significant concentration of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which is the psychoactive constituent of marijuana.

The CSA defines marijuana as “all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of such plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of such plant, its seeds or resin. Such term does not include the mature stalks of such plant, fiber produced from such stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of such plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of such mature stalks (except the resin extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of such plant which is incapable of germination.”[1]

Under this definition, CBD extracted from the excluded parts of the hemp plant should qualify.  However, about the end of 2017, the USPTO began refusing applications for marks for any product containing CBD, even when the applicant signed a declaration stating that the CBD was extracted from non-marijuana sources.

As the law and practice stand, because the product must be used lawfully, and marijuana is unlawful under the CSA, trademarks for marijuana and marijuana-based products (including CBD products) cannot be registered federally.  However, trademarks for many cannabis products (including CBD products) can be registered in California.

If you have a cannabis based business and questions about your cannabis related trademarks, schedule a consultation to discuss your questions with us!

[1] 21 U.S.C. § 802(16).

Beginning the Patent Application Process – Prior Art Search and Patentability Opinion

How we think (read: hope) the patent process goes: invent something, file a patent application, get the patent, make millions!!!

Beyond the first step, the process is more involved.  And before you file a patent application for your invention, it is important to understand the process of applying for, and hopefully receiving, a patent.

In short, starting with a (professional) prior art search and patentability analysis is an up-front cost, but may save you money in the long run.  Schedule a free initial phone consultation with a registered patent attorney to see if it is right for you!

Now, back to the details of the patent application process.

The first step in the process of filing your patent application is determining whether your invention is patentable.  Patentable inventions include processes (i.e., a way of doing something), machines, articles of manufacture, and compositions of matter (molecules, etc.), but the consideration does not end there.  To be patentable, an invention must be new, useful, and non-obvious.  The first two requirements fall largely within the common understanding of the English words “new” and “useful”.  For an invention to be new, it must not have been invented by someone else before you; for an invention to be useful, it must serve a purpose.  Usefulness is the easiest of the requirements to meet.  After all, a rock is useful as a paperweight.  But the remaining requirements, novelty (patent-ese for new) and non-obviousness, involve more consideration.

You may be thinking, “how can you tell if it has been invented by someone else before?”  Well, I am glad you asked.

Google can be a useful tool when you’re trying to find an answer, or a restaurant, or even a patent.  However, a typical internet search is not a sufficient way to investigate whether your invention is new and non-obvious.  Determining that your invention is sufficiently new to warrant filing a patent application typically involves a prior art search.  “Prior art” includes the inventions in the same field as your invention that happened before your invention.  Prior art that will prevent your invention from being patentable includes issued patents, printed publications, inventions that are known and/or used, and inventions that are offered for sale.  When you get into the gory details, additional geographic and timing questions are relevant, but the patent attorney you hire can help with those details.

To find out whether your invention may be novel and non-obvious, and therefore warrants filing a patent application, a licensed patent practitioner should order a prior art search and analyze your invention in light of the search results.

The prior art search and analysis provides multiple benefits.  The first benefit is a determination that your invention is novel.[1]  The second benefit is providing some insight into the state of the art of your invention.  This can help the patent practitioner who is preparing your patent application to distinguish your invention from other inventions in the prior art.  By preparing your patent application to distinguish your invention from the prior art, you may reduce the number of times the patent practitioner you’ve hired needs to respond to letters from the patent office, thus reducing the cost of your patent application.

The third benefit is to provide some insight into whether your invention is non-obvious.  The term “obvious”, as used in patent-ese, has a different meaning than when the word obvious is used in everyday speech.   In patent-ese, obviousness refers to whether your invention could have been made using two or more pieces of prior art that, when combined, make your invention.  The fact that no one has ever actually combined the prior art in the way you suggest does not make your invention non-obvious.[2]  Once again, when you get into the gory details, the obviousness consideration is more complex, but that is why you’re planning to hire a patent practitioner help you in the process.

Once you have decided to move forward with the preparation and filing of your patent application, the practitioner you’ve hired will work with you to draft a complete description of your invention, including a written description, drawings of the invention, and a set of patent claims.  The claims are the part of the patent application that describes exactly what your invention is.

After your patent application is prepared and you have reviewed and approved it, your application is filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), and the filing and prosecution fees are paid.  The word “prosecution” is typically associated with criminal court, but that’s not the ways it is used here.  Patent prosecution describes the process of filing a patent application and responding to communications from the USPTO until your application has one or more claims allowed, or you decide to abandon the application.

[1] The results of a prior art search and the opinion of a patent practitioner cannot be guaranteed.  No prior-art search can be completely comprehensive, and the examiner at the Patent Office may find a reference not identified in the prior art search, or may simply have a different opinion, and may still reject an application based on novelty.

[2] The results of a prior art search and the opinion of a patent practitioner cannot be guaranteed.  No prior-art search can be completely comprehensive, and the examiner at the Patent Office may find a reference not identified in the prior art search, or may simply have a different opinion, and may still reject an application for obviousness.