1207.06 Letter of Protest Evidence
A third party that has knowledge of facts bearing upon the registrability of a mark in a pending application may bring such information to the attention of the Office by filing, with the Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Trademark Examination Policy, a "letter of protest," that is, a letter that recites the facts and which is accompanied by supporting evidence. [ Note 1.] The Deputy Commissioner will determine whether the information should be given to the examining attorney for consideration. See TBMP § 215. If the examining attorney issues an Office action that includes any materials submitted with the letter of protest, that material becomes part of the record of the application for appeal. [ Note 2.]
Proceedings in an ex parte appeal will not be suspended pending determination by the Deputy Commissioner of a letter of protest. However, if a letter of protest is granted during the pendency of an ex parte appeal, and the examining attorney, having considered the supporting evidence submitted with the letter of protest, wishes to make that evidence of record in the application, that is, wishes to rely on the evidence to support the appealed refusal of registration, the examining attorney may file a written request with the Board, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 2.142(d), to suspend the appeal and remand the application for further examination. See TBMP § 1207.02 for information concerning a request for remand for additional evidence.
The request must be filed prior to the rendering of the Board’s final decision on the appeal, and must be accompanied by the additional evidence sought to be introduced. See TBMP § 1207.02. In addition, the request must include a showing of good cause therefor, in the same manner as any other request to remand for additional evidence. See TBMP § 1207.02 for information concerning good cause for a remand for additional evidence.
Evidentiary value of material submitted by a third party through a letter of protest will depend on whether it meets evidentiary requirements for authentication or foundation, identified as to nature or source. [ Note 3.]
NOTES:
1. See In re Candy Bouquet International Inc., 73 USPQ2d 1883, 1884 n.2 (TTAB 2004); TMEP § 1715 et seq.
2. In re Urbano, 51 USPQ2d 1776, 1778 n.4 (TTAB 1999).
3. In re Urbano, 51 USPQ2d 1776, 1779 (TTAB 1999) (documents of limited evidentiary value because no affidavits or other evidence establishing foundation, and no information establishing authenticity or source).