T.M.E.P. § 1006
Assignment of ¤44 Applications

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 (§1005) | Next Section (§1007)

1006 Assignment of §44 Applications

A §44 applicant may assign the foreign application or registration and/or the United States application from the original applicant to another party.

Assignee Must Be Eligible for the Benefits of §44

In order to continue to claim the benefits of §44 after such an assignment, the assignee of the United States application must be eligible for the benefits of §44. Nestle Co., Inc. v. Grenadier Chocolate Co., Ltd., 212 USPQ 214 (TTAB 1981); In re Fisons Ltd., 197 USPQ 888 (TTAB 1978). See TMEP §1002.01 regarding applicants eligible for registration under §44(e), and TMEP §1002.02 regarding applicants eligible for a priority filing date under §44(d).

To be eligible for registration under §44(e), the assignee must establish that the country that issued the relevant registration is the assignee's country of origin. TMEP §§1002.01 and 1002.04. See also TMEP §1004 regarding the requirements for registration under §44(e).

To be eligible for a priority filing date under §44(d), the assignee must establish that the assignee's country of origin is a party to an international treaty or agreement with the United States that provides a right of priority, or extends reciprocal rights of priority to United States nationals. See TMEP §§1002.02 , 1002.03 and 1002.04. See also TMEP §1003.

In any §44 application, if the assignee is not entitled to registration under §44(e), the examining attorney must refuse registration under that basis. The applicant may amend the application to claim §1(a) or §1(b) as a basis. See TMEP §§806.03 et seq. regarding amendment of the basis.

In a §44(d) application, if the assignee is not eligible for a priority filing date, the examining attorney should advise the assignee that it is not entitled to priority, ensure that the priority claim is deleted from the TRAM database, and conduct a new search of Office records for conflicting marks. TMEP §1002.02.

Assignee Does Not Have To Be the Owner of the Underlying Foreign Application or Registration

The Trademark Act requires that an applicant own the underlying application or registration at the time of filing in the United States (or as of the filing date of the amendment adding or substituting §44 as a basis, for an application originally based on §1(a) or §1(b), and later amended to add or substitute §44 as a basis). TMEP §1005. However, if the applicant was the owner of the foreign application or registration on the filing date of the United States application (or amendment adding or substituting §44 as a basis), the applicant may assign the United States application to another party without assigning the underlying foreign application or registration to that party. In re De Luxe N.V., 990 F.2d 607, 26 USPQ2d 1475 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Therefore, examining attorneys should not require proof of assignment of the underlying foreign application or registration when an applicant assigns the United States application.

Designation of Domestic Representative Encouraged

If the United States application is assigned to a party who is not domiciled in the United States, the assignee may file an appointment of a domestic representative with the assignment of the United States application. 15 U.S.C. 1060(b); 37 C.F.R. 3.61. See TMEP §604. The Office encourages parties who do not reside in the United States to designate domestic representatives. This can be done through TEAS, at www.uspto.gov/teas/index.html.