TRADEMARK POST REGISTRATION (161) Trademark Rule 2.165 Requirement Where A Section 8 Affidavit Or Declaration Is Held Insufficient Several recent Petitions to the Commissioner have indicated a failure on the part of registrants and their attorneys to follow the requirements of Trademark Rule 2.165. Therefore, reviewing certain basic elements of this rule is considered timely so as to alert registrants and attorneys to technical errors which might lead to the cancellation of a valuable trademark registration. Part (a) of Rule 2.165 indicates that the examiner will notify the registrant when an affidavit or declaration of use under Section 8 of the Statute is insufficient and the reasons therefor. When the registrant wishes the examiner to reconsider the affidavit or declaration, or when the registrant has taken additional steps to rectify the deficiencies and desires to have the examiner reconsider the affidavit or declaration in light of those steps, the request for reconsideration must be submitted within 6 months of the date of mailing of the notice of insufficiency. Note, however, that a supplemental or substitute affidavit or declaration required by Section 8 cannot be considered unless it is received before the expiration of the six year anniversary of the registration. Consequently, registrants should file their affidavits as early as possible during the sixth year following registration. There are situations where correcting the deficiency in the affidavit or declaration requires recording an assignment with the Assignment Division of this Office. If the recording cannot be completed within 6 months, the registrant must at least respond to the examiner's notice of insufficiency within that period. The response must indicate the steps being taken to correct the deficiency. The examiner can then allow the registrant additional time or suspend action depending on the circumstances. Registrants must always observe the "six month response" period whenever responding to the examiner from an adverse action. Part (b) of Rule 2.165 permits a registrant to request the Commissioner to review the action of the examiner when he is dissatisfied with that action. Review by the Commissioner should be sought only where it is believed that the examiner has erred in his action. In other words, the Commissioner's role is to review the correctness of the examiner's action and not to serve as an alter ego of the examiner before whom the registrant may seek to correct deficiencies. When review by the Commissioner has been sought, the decision on that request constitutes the final action of the Patent and Trademark Office. If no review by the Commissioner is sought and if no request for reconsideration of an examiner's action is timely filed, the Commissioner will notify the registrant of the deficiency in the affidavit or declaration after the sixth year has expired. Such notice is never mailed prior to the expiration of the sixth year following registration nor until a reasonable time has elapsed following a six month period from the last action mailed by this Office. This notice constitutes the final action of the Patent and Trademark Office in those cases where the Commissioner's review has not been sought. Once this notice has been mailed, it is too late (under the Rules of Practice) to request the Commissioner to review the action of the examiner. Review would only be proper if an affiant could show circumstances sufficient to suspend the finality element of Rule 2.165(b) pursuant to Rule 2.148. Registrants will be held to strict compliance with Rule 2.165 as it has been briefed above. Therefore, parties are urged to respond fully as soon as possible after an action is received from the examiner. Dec. 12, 1977 BERNARD A. MEANY Assistant Commissioner for Trademarks. [966 TMOG 80]