A holder may claim a right of priority within the meaning of Article 4 of the Paris Convention if:
- (1) The request for extension of protection contains a claim of priority;
- (2) The request for extension of protection specifies the filing date, serial number, and country of the application that forms the basis for the claim of priority; and
- (3) The date of international registration or the date of the recordal of the subsequent designation requesting an extension of protection to the United States is not later than 6 months after the date of the first regular national filing (within the meaning of Article 4(A)(3) of the Paris Convention) or a subsequent application (within the meaning of Article 4(C)(4) of the Paris Convention).
Section 67 of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. §1141g; Article 4(2); see also Paris Convention Article 4(D).
To be eligible for a claim of priority in a §66(a) application, the holder must file the request for extension of protection to the United States within 6 months of the date of the filing that forms the basis of the priority claim. If the United States is designated for an extension of protection in an international application, the international registration date cannot be later than 6 months after the date of the filing that formed the basis of the priority claim. If a request for extension of protection to the United States is made in a subsequent designation, the date of recordal of the subsequent designation cannot be later than 6 months after the date of the filing that formed the basis of the priority claim. The USPTO's electronic systems use the dates provided in the international registration to automatically calculate whether an application receives the benefit of a priority claim. If the "Priority Claimed" field indicates "YES," the "Priority Claimed Date" is to be treated as the effective filing date. See TMEP §206.02 for information on claiming priority under §67, 15 U.S.C. §1141g. If the "Priority Claimed" field indicates "NO," this means the priority claim is outside the 6-month filing date that forms the basis of the priority claim, even if priority information is included in the §66(a) application. If otherwise issuing an Office action, an advisory may be included to notify the applicant that their priority claim will not be honored. However, the advisory is not necessary if the application is in condition for publication upon initial examination.
In some cases, another U.S. application filed after the §66(a) applicant’s priority date may proceed to publication or registration because the request for extension of protection for the §66(a) application was not yet of record in the United States when the examining attorney searched USPTO records for conflicting marks. If the USPTO learns that a §66(a) application is entitled to priority over another pending application before the other mark registers, the USPTO will take appropriate action to give the §66(a) application the priority to which it is entitled. The §66(a) applicant may bring the priority-date issue to the USPTO’s attention by submitting a letter of protest in the other pending application. See TMEP §1715 regarding letters of protest.
If an examining attorney discovers a conflicting application entitled to priority under §66(a) after taking action in a case, the examining attorney must issue a supplemental action correcting the situation. If the mark has been published, the examining attorney must request jurisdiction before issuing the action. See TMEP §§1504.01 and 1504.04(a) regarding the examining attorney’s jurisdiction.
However, if the conflicting mark has already registered, the USPTO does not act to cancel the registration sua sponte. The §66(a) applicant may seek to cancel the registration by filing a petition for cancellation with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.