611.02    Signatures by Authorized Parties Required

All documents filed in the USPTO must be properly signed.  The USPTO staff must review the application or registration record to determine whether the applicant or registrant is represented by a qualified U.S. attorney, and must ensure that all documents are properly signed.

Two types of signatures may be required when filing documents with the USPTO: (1) a verification signature and/or (2) a submission signature.

Verification signature. Verifications of facts on behalf of an applicant or registrant must be sworn to, made under oath or in an affidavit, or supported by a declaration, and properly signed by someone meeting the requirements of 37 C.F.R. §2.193(e)(1).   See 37 C.F.R. §2.2(n); TMEP §§611.03(a), 804.04.

Submission signature. Most other submissions must be properly signed by the applicant or registrant, someone with legal authority to bind a juristic applicant or registrant (e.g., a corporate officer or general partner of a partnership), or by a qualified U.S. attorney.  This includes amendments, responses to Office actions, petitions to the Director under 37 C.F.R. §2.146  or §2.147,letters of express abandonment, requests to divide, and requests to change the correspondence address.  

Generally, if the applicant or registrant is represented by a qualified U.S. attorney, the attorney must sign the submission. 37 C.F.R. §§2.193(a),(e)(2)(i),(e)(5)(i), (e)(9)(i), 11.18(a).  This applies to both in-house and outside counsel.  If the applicant or registrant is not represented by a qualified U.S. attorney, the submission must be signed by the individual applicant or registrant or someone with legal authority to bind a juristic applicant or registrant (e.g., a corporate officer or general partner of a partnership).  In the case of joint applicants or registrants who are not represented by such an attorney, all must sign. 37 C.F.R. §2.193(a), (e)(2)(ii), (e)(5)(ii), (e)(9)(ii).

See TMEP §§611.03–611.03(i) for guidelines as to the proper person to sign specific documents, §§611.06–611.06(h) for guidelines on persons with legal authority to bind various types of legal entities, and §611.04 for examples of authorized and potentially unauthorized parties.

611.02(a)    TEAS Signature Radio Buttons

On most TEAS forms, the person signing the submission must confirm that he or she is authorized to sign the document by clicking one of three buttons indicating that he or she is:

  • (1) An owner/holder (or a person with legal authority to bind the owner or holder) who has not previously been represented in this matter, or was previously represented by a qualified U.S. attorney who has withdrawn or whose power has been revoked;
  • (2) An authorized U.S.-licensed attorney who is an active member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of a U.S. state (including the District of Columbia and any U.S. Commonwealth or territory) who is the owner’s or holder’s current attorney, or an associate thereof, and that if the owner or holder was previously represented by a different U.S.-licensed attorney associated with a different company/firm, the previous power has been revoked, the previously appointed attorney has withdrawn, a new power of attorney has been filed appointing the current attorney as either the attorney or an associate attorney; or
  • (3) An authorized Canadian trademark attorney/agent who has been appointed to represent the owner or holder and has been granted reciprocal recognition under 37 C.F.R §11.14(c)(1)  by the USPTO’s Office of Enrollment and Discipline and is an authorized signatory based on 37 C.F.R §11.14(c)(2).

The USPTO will accept these statements unless there is conflicting information in the record or the USPTO is otherwise made aware of conflicting information.

Example:  If, as part of the submitted attorney information, an attorney lists a foreign address and checks the box indicating that he or she is an active member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of a U.S. state, the USPTO will accept this statement, as long as there is no conflicting information in the record.

Example:  If an attorney indicates that the applicant was previously unrepresented, or that the applicant was previously represented by another attorney who has withdrawn or whose power has been revoked, when, in fact, there is another attorney of record whose power has not been revoked, the USPTO must inquire into the signatory’s authority to sign, because there is inconsistent information in the record.

Example:  If the signatory selects the owner/holder radio button, indicating that he or she is a person with legal authority to bind a juristic applicant (e.g., a corporate officer or general partner of a partnership), but sets forth a title that the USPTO would not normally accept (e.g., accountant, paralegal, or trademark administrator), the USPTO will inquire into the signatory’s authority to sign, because there is inconsistent information in the record.

Example:  If, instead of selecting the "authorized U.S.-licensed attorney" radio button, the attorney selects one of the other radio buttons (i.e., indicating that the owner/holder is not represented by an attorney, or that the attorney is an authorized Canadian trademark attorney or agent, representing a Canadian applicant), an issue of signatory authority arises, and the USPTO will inquire into the signatory’s authority to sign, because there is inconsistent information in the record.

Exception:  If the signatory indicates that he or she is a Canadian trademark attorney or agent who has been granted reciprocal recognition by OED, and there is a qualified U.S.-licensed attorney designated, the USPTO staff must still check the OED list to verify this information.  See TMEP §602.03(a) for further information about Canadian trademark attorneys and agents.

See TMEP §611.05(a) and §712.03 regarding issuance of a notice of incomplete response where there is a question as to a signatory’s authority to sign.