Many online trademark services are purely administration centers where you deal with a trained operator following a script rather than a trademark attorney. They SAY they’ll get you your trademark, but what they really do is fill in the blanks in the application form and send it in. They consider a “filing” a success.  A “filed” trademark application is waiting for approval.  You get a number showing your application is filed.

THE NATIONAL TRADEMARK CENTER DIFFERENCE

At National Trademark Center we know from our extensive experience how important every little detail on the application is. The Examiners at the Trademark office are motivated to prevent new marks from registering. They view an approved trademark as a privilege, and they hunt and peck to find as many flaws in an application as possible. As a result, 80% of all new applications that are “filed” get rejected.  Our acceptance rate at National Trademark Center is exceptional.  Doing things right the first time saves you both time and money.

Related posts:

1. Why Choose National Trademark Center? Registering a trademark is often a more complicated process that...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

A Selection of Trademarks that we Currently Handle:

A & H Motors

Adrian San Pedro (individual)

Beaucoup Wedding Favors, Inc.

CMJJ Gourmet (Clement Muney, individual)

Erin McKool (individual)

GuavaTalk LLC

Glamma Gramma

Go Sisterhood Corp.

The Harlem Magic Masters Int'l Inc.

Heuk Choo Kwan LLC

HMG Studios, Inc.

Little Learning, Inc.

Oxygen Financial Inc.

Pacific Bay Watch, Inc.

Pyure Brands, LLC

STA ELEMENTS

Sum Sum LLC

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Descriptions and costs of trademark search services:

Comprehensive Search and Application $549 (plus $325 government filing fee per class)
Includes searches for marks on the U.S. Federal, State (all 50 states), Common Law (over 15,000,000 records) and Domain Names (.com, .net, and .org) registries. We prepare reports of all similar and conflicting marks, as well as an opinion letter with a legal recommendation. We also include a prepared federal application. If the search reveals a conflict we will conduct an additional search for a new name at no additional charge.

Comprehensive Search – $399
Includes searches for marks on the U.S. Federal, State (all 50 states), Common Law (over 15,000,000 records) and Domain Name (.com, .net, and .org) registries. We include an opinion letter with a legal recommendation as well.

File a Trademark or Servicemark – $249 (plus $325 government filing fee per class)
Includes preparation of a federal trademark or service mark application. You provide us with the information, including owner information, mark name, description of goods or services, and date of first use. We prepare the application for your review and signature, and file it electronically for you.

Basic Federal Search – $199
Includes a search of all conflicting and similar marks on the US Federal Registry, reports of the search results, and an opinion letter by an attorney with a legal recommendation concerning the searched trademark.

Response to Office Action (Non-Substantive) – $300

Response to Office Action (Substantive) – $750

Statement of Use, per class (Includes Government Fee)- $350

Request for Extension of Time, per class (Includes Government Fee)- $350

Registration Certificate & Maintenance Letter – $150

Amendment to Alleged Use – $350 (Includes Government Fee)

Cease & Desist Letter – $750

Renewal of Trademark Registration – $750 (Includes Government Fee)

Section 8 Post-Registration Declaration of Use – $600 (Includes Government Fee)

Domain Name Cases via the National Arbitration Center – $1500 (Not Including Filing Fee

Miscellaneous Services

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Registering a trademark is often a more complicated process that it might appear to be. Dealing with the Trademark Office can be intimidating. The attorneys at the National Trademark Center deal with the Trademark Office every day, and have been doing so since 1994. We offer a no-nonsense approach to your application. We don’t waste your time or your money. We don’t offer false hope. We know how to draft your application, deal with the Trademark Examiners, and get your application approved. We’ve been doing it for over a decade and what we do works.  Learn more about the Trademark Registration Process.

CONTACT NATIONAL TRADEMARK CENTER TODAY

Call us today with your trademark questions, or to order a trademark search or application.

Call now 215 667 8704 or email our CEO and Managing Attorney Natalie Levy

Peruse our site for more trademark information, Trademark Law and Trademark News. We are happy to answer any questions you have.

Our website is full of trademark related information, including Trademark FAQs as well as regularly updated trademark-related news stories. Contact us today if you’d like more information about trademark services or if you have any questions or concerns regarding getting your trademark approved.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Yes, it’s true. A person can trademark his own name. It has been reported by newsfeed.time.com and many other sources that Governor Sarah Palin applied for the trademark “Sarah Palin” and her application was rejected. There is a very simple explanation for this.

When a person’s name is the trademark, a written consent needs to be included in the application. Sarah Palin did not include this written consent.

So, while the news is hyped up about her not getting her trademark accepted, this is a mere technicality that occurs to over 80% of all trademark applications filed. It can be corrected and then, will continue on it’s way through the regular examination process.

If a person wants to use his or her name for a trademark, he has to have it used in commerce. One cannot simply trademark his name for the heck of it. There must be a bona fide intent to use the name in commerce, in connection with goods or services. Of course, if the name is already in use, that is fine, too.

Many superstars have trademarked their names: Tina Turner (for clothing, music, posters, entertainment services),  ‘Madonna’ (for clothing), and David Letterman (for entertainment services, t-shirts, mugs) to name just a few. And more and more famous name are being protected with a trademark every day.  It’s smart business.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Various sources report that Your Baby Can, LLC has been aggressively enforcing their trademark rights via law firm Johnson & Pham, LLP of California. The term “aggressively enforcing their trademark rights” is actually not the correct  description of what they are doing.

Baby Can’s law firm has been scanning the Ebay list of sellers who are legitimately re-selling their used BABY CAN READ products, and sending them demand letters not only demanding that the seller cease and desist offering the item for sale, but also, they have the gall to demand a signed affidavit and a healthy check! People have attested to amounts ranging from $700 all the way to $10,00.  These people are private, individuals, and overall lawful citizens who are scared by such legal tactics.

If you or anyone you know has received such a letter, we urge you to 1) not send any money; 2) report the law firm to the California Bar Association, the Attorney General’s Office of California, and the Better Business Bureau.  This advice applies to any similar situation. Not all law firms are legitimate. This is harassment clear and simple. No law firm can demand money from you for simply re-selling a used item.

The essence of the demand letter includes a claim that the BABY CAN READ items being offered for resale are counterfeit. If that is the case, the law firm needs to go after the real culprit – the original seller, and the manufacturer of the counterfeit items. Not normal ebay users who hold ordinary jobs, and do not profit from a single solitary re-sold used item.

It is always disturbing to us at the National Trademark Center to hear of such behavior among lawyers,
especially in the field of Intellectual Property.

It seems that these lawyers have convinced their client, Your Baby Can LLC, that going after every reseller, no matter how insignificant, is a way to make a fast buck. Don’t be intimidated!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Choosing a good name for your products takes effort. You can do it successfully if you take the following steps.

Nobody wants to choose a name, invest money and resources into their product, only to find out that the name has already been taken!

1. Think of features or attributes of your product

2. Make a list of these words

3. Think of your competitors

4. List these competitors, and make sure not to use them, or any similar sounding names

5. Narrow down your list to 10 or 15 names

6. Search on the internet for these names in every possible spelling

7. Document your findings; your list should be narrowed down to 4-5 names

8. Conduct a free search on the USPTO website

9. Conduct a search for business names using state directories, telephone directories, etc.

10. Order a comprehensive trademark search from a competent Trademark Attorney or the National Trademark Center*.

* In this final step, a search will be conducted on the final mark you have chosen. The results will be analyzed by Attorney Natalie Levy and an opinion letter will be drafted, explaining to you the likelihood of having  your name approved for registration, the competition, etc.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

A few weeks ago, we posted an article about the use of trademarks in films. One filmmaker actually contacted the Philip Morris company, seeking permission to use the MARLBORO trademark in his film. It was on a large sign inside a convenience store, where a scene was occurring.

Philip Morris wrote him that the use of their trademark is protected under the doctrine of “fair use.” They also went on to explain a class action lawsuit that was settled in 1998 regarding use of their trademark in media. Take a look at the article here at the Nolo Blog.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

On December 30, 2010, the New York Times reported that New York city ordinance was struck down, which would have forced retailers to post graphic pictures of diseased lungs, brains and teeth in shops to discourage the purchasing of tobacco products. This was referred to as the “Anti-Smoking Poster Law” and would have applied to all small kiosks and convenience stores. As many of you undoubtedly know, these types of stores are heavily populated by teenagers i.e. young smokers.

The Judge hearing the case wrote that while the law was well intentioned, it violated federal law.

In 1965 a federal law called the Labeling Act was enacted, which gave the federal government exclusive authority over cigarette warnings.

In his ruling, Judge Rakoff pointed out that the Labeling Act also contained a provision forbidding any state
laws from conflicting with the federal government’s policies on cigarette warnings and advertisements. That, he concluded, makes the city’s poster policy illegal.

Hopefully, another angle can be found, making it completely legal to allow this cool law. Why should Australia beat us in curbing cigarette smoking? Why should they be the only ones publicizing the nasty effects of cigarettes? Don’t YOU want to see graphic images of rotting teeth and lungs?

Please submit any related story. We obviously are fond of this topic as we are vigilant anti-smokers.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

In July, we posted an article announcing the upcoming Australian ban on trademarks on tobacco products.  As you readers may recall, the ban will begin in July 2012.

For the last five years,  health warnings on tobacco products have been mandatory. The change that will occur starting in July 2012, will be that tobacco packages must be generic. That means no trademarks allowed on any tobacco product! All names of cigarettes will appear identical, in a standard font and size. Australia is doing this to reduce tobacco consumption. They say doing so will generate money that can be “plowed into the health system.” (NY Times.com)

The action was praised by the World Health Organization, which called the law “a new gold standard for the regulation of tobacco products.” Wake Forest IP Journal

Of course, not everyone is happy about these changes.  Tobacco companies, for one. They argue that the new rules will encourage counterfeiting, and will make it difficult for consumers to recognize brands they trust. We can expect tobacco companies to fight these measures, claiming their Intellectual Property rights are being “damaged.” (Of course, it is all in the name of saving lives. How can they complain?)

And the fighting has already begun. World tobacco giant British American Tobacco recently accused Australian importer Trojan, of trademark infringement when it’s Captain Black cigar packages were covered with ugly graphic photos of decaying lung tissue and the words “lung cancer” were stamped across the front of the picture.  (see picture above). But would YOU buy a product with such a clear and graphic warning? We think this strategy could work and effectively reduce smoking.

We applaud the government Australia on this remarkable and brave position.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.