Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comClient Alert
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: June 4, 2020
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comThe U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) continues to extend deadlines for certain patent and trademark filings. This is the third round of extensions that the USPTO has granted in response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
As discussed in greater detail in prior articles, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) authorized the USPTO to extend certain statutory deadlines in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. On March 31, the USPTO exercised that authority by providing a 30-day extension of certain due dates in patent and trademark matters that had an original due date between March 27 and April 30, 2020. On April 28, the USPTO further extended deadlines to June 1, 2020. However, the most recent extension to July 1 applies only to small and micro-entities.
“The USPTO has already extended various deadlines twice, with the latest extension expiring at the end of this month. However, the USPTO recognizes that the COVID-19 pandemic continues to impose various hardships, especially on small businesses and individual inventors,” the USPTO said in a press statement. “Accordingly, as stakeholders continue to navigate the effects of the pandemic in various ways, and as more and more of them are resuming operations, the USPTO will again extend certain deadlines.”
For small and micro entities, filings that would have been deemed timely filed, if filed by June 1, 2020 pursuant to the CARES Act Notice dated April 28, 2020, will now be deemed timely filed if filed by July 1, 2020. For large entities, after May 31, 2020, relief will be available to those who need it on a case-by-case basis. The USPTO advises that requests can be submitted through a petition for an extension of time or a petition to revive.
As set forth in the USPTO’s official notice, it is also extending its waiver of the petition fee for filing a petition for the revival of applications that became abandoned on or before June 30, 2020, if accompanied by a statement that the delay in filing or payment was due to the COVID-19 outbreak.
With regard to trademark fees and deadlines, the USPTO is also providing relief on a case-by-case basis. As set forth in the USPTO’s official notice, relief will be granted as follows:
The USPTO will continue to waive the petition fee for petitions to revive applications or reinstate registrations that became abandoned or expired/cancelled as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak, with a statement that the delay in filing or payment was due to the COVID-19 outbreak. With regard to proceedings before the TTAB, if the COVID-19 outbreak has prevented or interfered with a filing, parties can make a request (in ex-parte appeals) or motion (for trial cases) for an extension or reopening of time, as appropriate.
As with prior extensions, a delay is “due” to the COVID-19 outbreak when the outbreak materially interfered with the filing of a paper or fee. Circumstances that qualify as materially interfering include, without limitation, office closures, cash flow interruptions, lack of access to files or other materials, travel delays, personal or family illness, or other similar circumstances. The person affected by the outbreak may be a practitioner, applicant, patent owner, petitioner, third-party requester, inventor, or other person associated with the filing or fee.
According to the USPTO, it will continue to evaluate the evolving situation around the COVID-19 outbreak and the impact on the USPTO’s operations and stakeholders. If the USPTO further extends the CARES Act relief, we will provide updates here. If you have any questions regarding anything to do with the USPTO or if you wish to discuss seeking registration of your intellectual property, please do not hesitate to reach out to any members of our team.
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, Ivan Tukhtin, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-896-4100.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
New Jersey recently made changes to what is known as the Mansion Tax. New Jersey imposes an additional tax on the transfer of certain types of real estate when the sales price exceeds $1 million. Until recently, that tax was 1%. Under new legislation, that tax is now between 1% and 3.5%, depending on the […]
Author: Scott H. Novak
Relaxing land use restrictions benefits real estate developers, renters, and homebuyers, according to several recent studies. Although concerns exist that building more housing could do more harm than good when it comes to affordability, the data confirms that the principle of supply and demand also applies to the housing industry. Boosting supply is essential to […]
Author: Donald M. Pepe
The U.S. House of Representatives and Senate Committees on Appropriations have approved FY2026 Agriculture appropriations bills (H.R. 4121 and S. 2256) that would dramatically impact dramatically impact federal hemp regulation by redefining the statutory definition of hemp. The proposed changes would effectively redefine legal hemp cannabinoid products. They would include only those that are naturally […]
Author: Daniel T. McKillop
New bid thresholds for various New Jersey public entities took effect on July 1, 2025. Contracting Units are advised to review their procurement policies and implementing ordinances or resolutions to determine if any changes are necessary. Corporate governance principles can help public entities establish proper oversight and compliance procedures for procurement activities. Adjustments to New […]
Author: David L. Blank
States have a problem. As costs and expenses rise, they must find new ways to raise revenue that is politically palatable that the taxpayers can live with. What is a state like New Jersey to do when it is staring at a $1.2 billion budget deficit? It already has exceedingly high property taxes. The sales […]
Author: Scott H. Novak
Many trademark scammers send official looking letters or emails urging immediate action to pressure you to pay them money for your trademark or “additional” services you do not require. If you ever receive a notice asking for payment as to your trademark from any such company, DO NOT PAY IT. To all our clients, we […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!