T.M.E.P. § 1003.01
The 'First-Filed' Requirement

Executive summary:

This document contains one section of the Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (the "TMEP"), Fourth Edition (April 2005). This page was last updated in June 2007. You may return to one either the section index, or to the key word index. If you wish to search the TMEP, simply use the search box that appears on the bottom of every page of BitLaw--be sure to restrict your search to the TMEP in the pop-up list.

For more information on trademark law, please see the Trademark Section of BitLaw.

Previous Section (§1003) | Next Section (§1003.02)

1003.01 The "First-Filed" Requirement

The application relied on under §44(d) must be the applicant's first application in a treaty country for the same mark and for the same goods or services. If the foreign country denominates an application in the foreign country as "An Application to Extend the Wares" or in some similar fashion, but the application is, in substance, the equivalent of a new application in the United States, the foreign application will be considered the first-filed for the purpose of meeting the requirements of §44(d) in the United States. However, the goods or services must be different from those covered by any previous application for the mark in a treaty country.

The §44(d) priority claim may be based upon a subsequently-filed application in the same foreign country, if the first-filed application was withdrawn, abandoned or otherwise disposed of without having any rights outstanding, and did not serve as a basis for claiming a right of priority.

The Office will presume that the application identified as the basis for the priority claim was the first-filed, unless there is contradictory evidence in the record.

If the examining attorney determines that the application relied on was not the first-filed, the examining attorney must refuse registration under §44 and advise the applicant that it is not entitled to priority. The applicant may amend the application to claim another basis. See TMEP §§806.03 et seq. regarding amendment of the basis. The examining attorney should ensure that the priority claim is deleted from the TRAM database, and should conduct a new search of Office records for conflicting marks.