Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 23 JUNE 2023

USPTO Proposes Trademark Fee Schedule Change

Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Contributor
Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Our high-caliber legal representation and advanced delivery capabilities allow us to take on our...

View firm profile
Explore more from Seyfarth Shaw LLP

On May 8, 2023, the USPTO announced its preliminary proposal to adjust its schedule of trademark fees, which was last modified January 2, 2021.[i] The USPTO states that the existing fee schedule...

United StatesIntellectual Property
Sarah Chemli
Sarah Chemli
Author LinkedIn connections

On May 8, 2023, the USPTO announced its preliminary proposal to adjust its schedule of trademark fees, which was last modified January 2, 2021.1 The USPTO states that the existing fee schedule does not allow for enough revenue because of (1) the change in both applicant filing behaviors and trademark demand, and (2) market inflation increasing aggregate costs.2 The USPTO anticipates that the fee changes would be implemented in November 2024 following a public comment period.3

This proposal affects six categories of trademark prosecution fees:4

  • Applications
  • Fees related to intent-to-use filings
    • These include statements of use, extensions to file a statement of use (of which five are permitted), as well as amendments to allege use.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

UMG v. DistroKid: When AI Becomes A Consumer Protection Issue

Universal Music Group's lawsuit against DistroKid raises a critical question about AI disclosure in consumer markets: when does the use of artificial intelligence become material information that must be disclosed to consumers? The case centers on allegations that DistroKid distributed mass-generated AI music while creating the impression it was created by legitimate human artists, potentially violating existing consumer protection laws even without specific AI disclosure requirements.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Article

U.S. Government Backs Fair Use For AI Training In OpenAI Copyright Litigation

The U.S. government has filed a Statement of Interest of the United States of America under 28 U.S.C. § 517 in the Southern District of New York multidistrict litigation over OpenAI’s use of copyrighted works to train large language models. The filing appears to be the federal government’s first direct intervention in the wave of artificial intelligence (AI) training copyright cases, and it advises the court to treat model training (separate from use of AI to generate outputs) on copyrighted text standing alone as a highly transformative fair use under current law.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Article

The Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal Of DMCA CMI Removal Claim Against AI Code Generator – Output Is A New Work Not A Copy Of Training Data

There was a significant ruling in the Doe v. Github case involving training of AI code generator models on open source. The United States Court of Appeals for The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court ruling dismissing part of an action brought under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) by programmers against GitHub, Inc., and other defendants. The issues centered on whether defendants removed copyright management information (CMI) from content used to train the AI code generator models.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Sheppard
Sheppard
Article

Is This Real? Navigating AI Impersonation Under New And Existing Laws

Is this AI-generated, or is it real? As generative AI tools have become increasingly capable of creating realistic images, videos, and audio, they have also made it easier to impersonate real people without their consent. In response, states are increasingly adopting laws that impose civil and criminal liability for certain AI-generated content that replicates an individual’s identity, likeness, voice, or other personal attributes.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Wiley Rein
Wiley Rein
Article

The Trademark Scam Field Guide: Look-Alike Filing Sites, Fake USPTO Notices, And How To Get Out If You’ve Been Caught

A business decides to file a trademark. Someone on the team searches for a familiar online legal-services brand, clicks the first result, and lands on a site with a similar-sounding name, a polished design, five-star reviews, and a low flat fee. The application gets filed. Months later the business learns the “service” was not who they thought it was, the filing was signed by someone with no authority to sign it, and the USPTO has suspended the application along with hundreds or thousands of others from the same shop.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Harness IP
Harness IP
Article

AI Learning Or AI Copying? Ninth Circuit Weighs In

The Ninth Circuit held that GitHub Copilot's AI-generated code did not violate DMCA's copyright management information (CMI) removal provisions, even when output resembled source code, because the system generated new works through probabilistic patterns rather than retrieving and stripping information from existing copies. This decision establishes a critical distinction between AI systems that learn and generate versus those that retrieve and reproduce, with significant implications for how courts evaluat
United StatesIntellectual Property
Ballard Spahr LLP
Ballard Spahr LLP
Article

A New Twist In The Salvadoran TPS Saga: USCIS Authorizes Work Through September 9, 2026

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has issued Individual Notices permitting certain Salvadoran Temporary Protected Status beneficiaries to demonstrate continued work authorization through September 9, 2026. This development arrives weeks after most TPS-based Employment Authorization Documents expired, creating challenges for employers and employees navigating reverification procedures and compliance requirements.
United StatesImmigration
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Article

DHS Allows Salvadoran TPS Beneficiaries To Work And Remain, For Now

The Department of Homeland Security has confirmed that Salvadoran Temporary Protected Status beneficiaries remain protected despite the September 9, 2026 expiration date, though no formal announcement has been made regarding the program's future. This development raises critical questions about employer obligations and the potential scenarios that may unfold, including termination with a 60-day notice period or an extension of the designation.
United StatesImmigration
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Article

California Legislative Update: Which Bills Will Make The Cut?

California's 2026 legislative session concluded with fewer employment bills than in previous years, but several significant measures await Governor Newsom's decision by September 30. Key proposals address automated decision systems in employment, workplace surveillance restrictions, expanded bereavement leave, AI-driven workforce displacement notices, and modifications to last year's controversial "stay-or-pay" legislation.
United StatesEmployment and HR
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Article

California Finally Modernizes First Aid Requirements: What Employers Need To Know

The California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board has approved significant revisions to California’s workplace first aid requirements for both construction and general industry. For general industry employers, the most notable change is the elimination of the longstanding requirement that first aid kit contents be approved by a consulting physician. Instead, employers may now comply by providing a first aid kit meeting ANSI/ISEA Z308.1-2021 Class A requirements.
United StatesEmployment and HR
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Article

2026 Mid-Year Report: ADA Title III Federal Lawsuit Numbers Are Climbing

Federal ADA Title III lawsuit filings have reached 5,006 cases at mid-year 2026, marking the highest level since 2021 and suggesting a potential record-breaking year ahead. California continues to dominate with 2,426 cases, while new plaintiffs' firms enter the market and filing patterns shift across states. Will 2026 surpass the all-time high of 11,452 lawsuits set in 2021?
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Article

European Commission Press Release: EU AI Act Transparency Enforcement Starts This Sunday! Do You Know Who Your Chatbots Are? We Break Down The Commission’s Guidelines On Transparency Below

The European Commission has announced that EU AI Act transparency rules take effect August 2, 2026, requiring chatbots to identify themselves, deepfakes to be labeled, and AI-generated content to be marked. Organizations must assess whether their AI systems trigger disclosure, labeling, or content-marking requirements, with limited exceptions and penalties reaching €15 million or 3% of global turnover for noncompliance.
GlobalPrivacy
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Article

The EU Cyber Resilience Act’s Reporting Started Last Friday, September 11. Here’s A Very, Very Brief Primer

The EU Cyber Resilience Act introduces mandatory cybersecurity requirements for products with digital elements sold in the European market, establishing a comprehensive framework for hardware and software security. Starting September 11, 2026, manufacturers face new reporting obligations for actively exploited vulnerabilities and severe security incidents, with strict timelines ranging from 24 hours to one month depending on the type of report.
AfghanistanPrivacy
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Seyfarth Shaw LLP