0054 Just Sub Submissions 08

SF-83 SUPPORTING STATEMENT
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
Substantive Submissions Made During the Prosecution
of the Trademark Application
OMB Control Number 0651-0054

A.

JUSTIFICATION

1.

Necessity of Information Collection

This collection of information is required by the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et
seq., which provides for the registration of trademarks, service marks, collective
trademarks and collective service marks, collective membership marks, and certification
marks. Individuals and businesses that use or intend to use such marks in commerce
may file an application to register their marks with the United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO).
Such individuals and businesses may also submit various communications to the
USPTO, including allegations of use; requests for extension of time to file a statement of
use; petitions to revive abandoned applications; requests to delete section 1(b) basis,
intent to use; requests for express abandonment; requests to divide; and other petitions.
Registered marks remain on the register for ten years and can be renewed, but will be
canceled unless the owner files with the USPTO a declaration attesting to the continued
use (or excusable non-use) of the mark in commerce within specific deadlines.
The rules implementing the Trademark Act are set forth in 37 CFR Part 2. These rules
require that each certificate of registration include a reproduction of the mark, the
particular goods and/or services for which it is registered, ownership information, dates
of use, the number and date of the registration, and certain other information. The
USPTO provides similar information concerning pending applications. The information
set forth in the register, and information provided in pending applications, can be
accessed through the USPTO website by individuals and businesses to determine the
availability of a mark. By searching the USPTO’s database, parties may lessen the
likelihood of initiating use of a mark that was previously adopted by another party.
Additionally, the trademark registration process may lessen litigation between parties.
The information in this collection can be submitted to the USPTO in paper or
electronically through the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS). There are
six electronic forms in this collection; however, there are only three official paper forms.
The USPTO does not provide an official paper form for the petition to revive abandoned
applications – failure to respond timely to office action; petition to revive abandoned
applications – failure to file timely statement of use or extension request; request to
delete section 1(b) basis, intent to use; request for express abandonment (withdrawal)
of application; nor for the other petitions. Individuals and businesses can submit their
own paper forms, following the USPTO’s rules and guidelines to ensure that they

provide all of the necessary information. Applicants who choose to submit their
applications electronically must use the TEAS forms.
The USPTO is proposing to delete the electronic Request to Divide requirement and
introduce a TEAS request to divide functionality as part of the existing Allegation of Use
and Extension Requests forms in the near future, as well as a stand-alone request to
divide form at a later point. In the meantime, if the applicant wants to file a post-notice
of action request to divide with a Statement of Use (SOU) and extension request, it
should be filed on paper. The extension request may first be filed through TEAS if the
extension is for all goods/services in the application. If not, then all three documents
should be filed on paper.
If the applicant is committed to filing a request to divide electronically, the applicant
must 1) file the extension for all of the goods; 2) fax in a request to divide with the
appropriate USPTO credit card authorization form; and 3) file the SOU wherein the
goods not in use are deleted, with a specific statement inserted in the description of the
specimen field that “A request to divide and extension request have been filed, and the
goods are not being deleted, but simply divided.”
Table 1 identifies the statutory and regulatory provisions pursuant to which the USPTO
collects the information:
Table 1: Information Requirements for Substantive Submissions Made During Prosecution of the
Trademark Application
Requirement

Statute

Allegation of use of a trademark/service mark

15 U.S.C. § 1051

Request for extension of time to file a statement of use

Rule
37 CFR Part 2, 2.76, 2.86
and 2.88

15 U.S.C. § 1051(d)(2)

37 CFR Part 2, 2.89

Petition to revive abandoned application – failure to respond
timely to an office action

15 U.S.C. § 1123

37 CFR Part 2, 2.66

Petition to revive abandoned application – failure to file timely
statement of use or extension request

15 U.S.C. § 1051(d)(4)

37 CFR Part 2, 2.66

Request to delete section 1(b) basis, intent to use

15 U.S.C. § 1123

37 CFR Part 2, 2.35

Request for express abandonment (withdrawal) of an application

15 U.S.C. § 1123

37 CFR Part 2, 2.68

Request to divide

Not Applicable

37 CFR Part 2, 2.87

Other petitions

Not Applicable

37 CFR Part 2, 2.146

2.

Needs and Uses

The USPTO uses the information described in this collection to process the substantive
submissions made during prosecution of the trademark application. The information in
this collection is a matter of public record and is used by the public for a variety of
private business purposes related to establishing and enforcing trademark rights. The
information is available at USPTO facilities and can also be accessed at the USPTO’s

2

website. Additionally, the USPTO provides the information to other entities, including
Patent and Trademark Depository Libraries (PTDLs). The PTDLs maintain the
information for use by the public.
The Information Quality Guidelines set forth in Section 515 of Public Law 106-554,
Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001, apply to
this information collection and comply with all applicable information quality guidelines,
i.e., OMB and specific operating unit guidelines.
This proposed collection of information will result in information that will be collected,
maintained, and used in a way consistent with all applicable OMB and USPTO
Information Quality Guidelines.
(See Ref. A, the USPTO Information Quality
Guidelines.)
Table 2 lists the information identified in this collection and explains how this information
is used by the public and by the USPTO:
Table 2: Needs and Uses of Substantive Submissions Made During Prosecution of the Trademark
Application
Form and Function

Form #

Trademark/Service Mark Allegation of
Use (Amendment to Allege
Use/Statement of Use)
(Ref. B)

PTO Form
1553

TEAS Trademark/Service Mark
Allegation of Use (Amendment to Allege
Use/Statement of Use)
(Ref. C)

PTO Form
1553

Request for Extension of Time to File a
Statement of Use
(Ref. D)

PTO Form
1581

Needs and Uses
•
•
•
•
•
•

TEAS Request for Extension of Time to
File a Statement of Use
(Ref. E)

PTO Form
1581

•
•

Petition to Revive Abandoned
Application – Failure to Respond Timely
to Office Action

No Form
Associated

•
•

3

Used by the public to notify the USPTO that a mark for which
registration is sought is in use in commerce.
Used by the USPTO to complete processing of applications for
registration.
Used by the public to electronically complete and file a
notification to the USPTO that a mark for which registration is
sought is in use in commerce.
Used by the USPTO to review electronically-filed applications
for registration.
Used by the public to request a six-month extension of time to
file a statement that the mark for which registration is sought is
in use in commerce.
Used by the USPTO to grant an extension of time to file a
statement that the mark for which registration is sought is in
use in commerce.
Used by the public to electronically complete and file a request
for a six-month extension of time to file a statement that the
mark for which registration is sought is in use in commerce.
Used by the USPTO to grant an extension of time to
electronically-filed statements that the mark for which
registration is sought is in use in commerce.
Used by the applicant to petition the USPTO to revive an
application that abandoned because of a failure to submit a
timely response to an office action.
Used by the USPTO to process a request to revive an
application that abandoned because of a failure to submit a
timely response to an office action.

TEAS Petition to Revive Abandoned
Application – Failure to Respond Timely
to Office Action
(Ref. F)

Form 2194

•

•

Petition to Revive Abandoned
Application – Failure to File Timely
Statement of Use or Extension Request

No Form
Associated

•
•

TEAS Petition to Revive Abandoned
Application – Failure to File Timely
Statement of Use or Extension Request
(Ref. G)

Form 2195

Request to Delete Section 1(b) Basis,
Intent to Use

No Form
Associated

•
•

•
•

TEAS Request to Delete Section 1(b)
Basis, Intent to Use
(Ref. H)

Form 2200

•

•

Request for Express Abandonment
(Withdrawal) of Application

No Form
Associated

•
•
•

TEAS Request for Express
Abandonment (Withdrawal) of
Application
(Ref. I)

Form 2202

Request to Divide

Can be filed
as part of
Forms 1553
and/or 0581

•

No Forms
Associated

•

Other Petitions

•

•

•

3.

Used by the applicant to electronically complete and file a
petition to the USPTO to revive an application that abandoned
because of a failure to submit a timely response to an office
action.
Used by the USPTO to process electronically-filed petitions to
revive an application that abandoned because of a failure to
submit a timely response to an office action.
Used by the applicant to petition the USPTO to revive an
application that abandoned because of a failure to file a timely
statement of use or extension request.
Used by the USPTO to process a petition to revive an
application that abandoned because of a failure to file a timely
statement of use or extension request.
Used by the applicant to electronically complete and file a
petition to revive an application that abandoned because of a
failure to file a timely statement of use or extension request.
Used by the USPTO to process electronically-filed petitions to
revive an application that abandoned because of a failure to file
a timely statement of use or extension request.
Used by the applicant to submit a request to delete a particular
statutory filing basis, section 1(b) basis, from an entire class of
goods and/or services from an application.
Used by the USPTO to process requests to delete a section
1(b) basis from an application.
Used by the applicant to electronically complete and file a
request to delete a particular statutory filing basis, section 1(b)
basis, from an entire class of goods and/or services from an
application.
Used by the USPTO to process electronically-filed requests to
delete a section 1(b) basis from an application.
Used by an applicant to submit a request to withdraw an
application.
Used by the USPTO to process requests to withdraw an
application.
Used by an applicant to electronically complete and file a
request to withdraw an application.
Used by the USPTO to process electronically-filed requests to
withdraw an application.
Used by the public to request that an application for registration
that identifies multiple goods and/or services be divided into
two or more separate applications.
Used by the USPTO to process requests that applications for
registration that identify multiple goods and/or services be
divided into two or more separate applications.
Used by an applicant or registrant to submit petitions to the
USPTO to request that the USPTO take, or refrain from taking,
particular actions with respect to registrations or applications
for registration.
Used by the USPTO to process petitions in which applicants or
registrants request that the USPTO take, or refrain from taking,
particular actions submitted after prosecution of the trademark
application.

Use of Information Technology

The USPTO currently offers four IT systems in support of this collection that are
accessible through the online Trademark Electronic Business Center (TEBC). The

4

TEBC provides descriptions of the systems, and the systems feature online “help”
programs. Thus, the USPTO offers the public a single source for a variety of IT
systems useful both for making submissions to the USPTO and for tracking the status of
these submissions.
The USPTO provides online electronic forms through the web-accessible Trademark
Electronic Application System (TEAS). Once completed, TEAS forms are transmitted to
the USPTO via the Internet. The TEAS forms include “help” instructions, as well as a
“Form Wizard” that tailors the form to the particular characteristics of the application or
registration in question, based on responses provided by the user to questions posed by
the “Wizard.” The forms filed are received within seconds after transmission, and a
confirmation of filing is immediately issued via e-mail to the user.
Users do not affix digital signatures to the TEAS forms. Instead, these forms are signed
using a combination of alphanumeric characters that the user selects and types
between two forward slashes. TEAS forms can be signed in this manner or the text
form of the application can be e-mailed to a second party who can then electronically
sign the application. The forms can also be signed by printing the signature page of the
form, signing it in ink, scanning the signed page, and then transmitting the entire form
and scanned signature page to the USPTO.
Please note that electronic forms can only be submitted via TEAS; filers may not e-mail
their own forms to the USPTO. Additionally, filers who submit drawings of marks that
are not “standard character” drawings must attach digitized images of these drawings to
their submissions.
The USPTO maintains an online image database of the electronic trademark application
or registration file wrapper entitled the Trademark Document Retrieval (TDR) system.
The USPTO also maintains an online system called the Trademark Application and
Registration Retrieval (TARR) system, which provides users with information regarding
the status of trademark applications and registrations. The data in the TARR system is
updated daily.
The USPTO provides a web-based record of registered marks, and marks for which
applications for registration have been submitted, called the Trademark Electronic
Search System (TESS). TESS can be used by potential applicants for trademark
registration to assist in the determination of whether or not a particular mark may be
available. The data in TESS is identical to the data reviewed by examining attorneys at
the USPTO in their determination of whether marks for which registration is sought are
confusingly similar to marks in existing registrations or to marks in pending applications
for registration. TESS allows for the user to choose from four different search tools, is
updated daily, and is easy to use.

5

4.

Efforts to Identify Duplication

This information is collected only when allegations of use; requests for extension of time
to file a statement of use; petitions to revive abandoned applications; requests to delete
section 1(b) basis, intent to use; requests for express abandonment; requests to divide;
and other petitions are submitted to the USPTO. This collection does not solicit any
data already available at the USPTO. This collection does not create a duplication of
effort.
5.
Minimizing the Burden to Small Entities
The USPTO believes that the submission of the information provided places no undue
burden on small businesses or other small entities. The same information is required
from every customer and is not available from any other source.
6.

Consequences of Less Frequent Collection

This information collection could not be conducted less frequently, since the information
is collected only when voluntarily submitted by the public. If the information were not
collected, the public would not be able to allege use of a trademark/service mark,
request an extension of time to file a statement of use, could not petition to revive
abandoned applications, could not request that a section 1(b) basis be deleted from
their applications, could not request express abandonment, could not file a request to
divide, or could not file petitions. The information could not be collected less frequently.
If this information were not conducted, the USPTO could not comply with the
requirements of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 and 37 CFR Part 2.
7.

Special Circumstances in the Conduct of Information Collection

There are no special circumstances associated with this collection of information.
8.

Consultation Outside the Agency

The 60-Day Notice was published in the Federal Register on April 4, 2008 (73 Fed Reg.
66). The public comment period ended on June 3, 2008. No public comments were
received.
Large and well-organized bar associations frequently communicate their views to the
USPTO. Also, the Trademark Public Advisory Committee (T-PAC) was created by the
American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 to advise the Director of the USPTO on the
agency’s operations, including its goals, performance, budget, and user fees. T-PAC
includes nine voting members who are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the
Secretary of Commerce. The statute also provides non-voting membership on the
Committee for the agency’s three recognized unions. Members include inventors,
lawyers, corporate executives, entrepreneurs, and academicians with significant
experience in management, finance, science, technology, labor relations, and
intellectual property issues. The members of T-PAC reflect the broad array of USPTO’s

6

stakeholders and embrace the USPTO’s e-government initiative. This diversity of
interests is an effective tool in helping the USPTO nurture and protect the intellectual
property that is the underpinning of America’s strong economy.
9.

Payment or Gifts to Respondents

This information collection does not involve a payment or gift to any respondent.
10.

Assurance of Confidentiality

Trademark applications and registrations are open to public inspection. Confidentiality
is not required in the processing of trademark applications.
Apart from the substantive components and burden statements, the TEAS forms also
include a link to the USPTO’s Web Privacy Policy. The “Privacy Policy Statement” link
is located above the PRA Burden Statement found at the end of the “Wizard” and at the
end of the forms themselves. The Web Privacy Policy Statement explains how the
USPTO handles any personal information collected from the public through the website,
and how it handles e-mails. Additionally, the statement also explains what information
is collected through the USPTO’s Kids Pages, and whether and why the USPTO uses
cookies to collect information.
11.

Justification for Sensitive Questions

None of the required information in this collection is considered to be of a sensitive
nature.
12.

Estimate of Hour and Cost Burden to Respondents

Table 3 calculates the anticipated burden hours and costs of this information collection
to the public, based on the following factors:
•

Respondent Calculation Factors
The USPTO estimates that it will receive the 228,115 responses per year for this
collection, with 196,051 filed electronically.

•

Burden Hour Calculation Factors
The USPTO estimates that it will take the public an average of 3 to 20 minutes (0.05 to
0.33 hours) to complete the collections of information described in this submission,
depending on the nature of the information. This includes time to gather the necessary
information, create the documents, and mail the completed request. The time estimates
shown for the electronic forms in this collection are based on the average amount of time
needed to complete and electronically file the associated form.

•

Cost Burden Calculation Factors
The professional rate of $310 per hour used in this submission to calculate the
respondent cost burden is the median rate for associate attorneys in private firms as
published in the 2007 report of the Committee on Economics of Legal Practice of the

7

American Intellectual Property Law Association. This report summarized the results of a
survey with data on hourly billing rates. This is a fully-loaded hourly rate.
The USPTO believes that the information in this collection will primarily be prepared by
attorneys, although some submissions may be prepared by pro se registrants.
Table 3: Burden Hour/Burden Cost to Respondents for Substantive Submissions Made During
Prosecution of the Trademark Application
Item

Hours
(a)

Responses
(yr)
(b)

Burden
(hrs/yr)
(c)
(a) x (b)

Rate
($/hr)
(d)

Total Cost
($/hr)
(e)
(c) x (d)

Trademark/Service Mark Allegation of Use
(Amendment to Allege Use/Statement of Use)
(PTO Form 1553)

0.22

10,475

2,305

$310.00

$714,550.00

TEAS Trademark/Service Mark Allegation of Use
(Amendment to Allege Use/Statement of Use)
(PTO Form 1553)

0.18

54,992

9,899

$310.00

$3,068,690.00

Request for Extension of Time to File a Statement of
Use
(PTO Form 1581)

0.17

10,211

1,736

$310.00

$538,160.00

TEAS Request for Extension of Time to File a
Statement of Use
(PTO Form 1581)

0.15

117,429

17,614

$310.00

$5,460,340.00

Petition to Revive Abandoned Application – Failure to
Respond Timely to Office Action

0.20

2,004

401

$310.00

$124,310.00

TEAS Petition to Revive Abandoned Application –
Failure to Respond Timely to Office Action
(PTO Form 2194)

0.08

8,015

641

$310.00

$198,710.00

Petition to Revive Abandoned Application – Failure to
File Timely Statement of Use or Extension Request

0.20

2,004

401

$310.00

$124,310.00

TEAS Petition to Revive Abandoned Application –
Failure to File Timely Statement of Use or Extension
Request
(PTO Form 2195)

0.08

8,015

641

$310.00

$198,710.00

Request to Delete Section 1(b) Basis, Intent to Use

0.07

194

14

$310.00

$4,340.00

TEAS Request to Delete Section 1(b) Basis, Intent to
Use
(PTO Form 2200)

0.05

1,100

55

$310.00

$17,050.00

Request for Express Abandonment (Withdrawal) of
Application

0.07

4,686

328

$310.00

$101,680.00

TEAS Request for Express Abandonment
(Withdrawal) of Application
(PTO Form 2202)

0.05

6,500

325

$310.00

$100,750.00

Request to Divide

0.08

1,990

159

$310.00

$49,290.00

Other Petitions

0.33

500

165

$310.00

51,150.00

Total

- - - -

228,115

34,684

- - - -

$10,752,040.00

8

13.

Total Annualized (Non-hour) Cost Burden

There are no capital start-up, maintenance, or record keeping costs. There is, however,
non-hour cost burden in the way of filing fees and postage costs.
Filing fees of $27,945,500 are associated with this collection. Filing fees are based on
per class filing of goods and services; therefore, the total filing fees can vary depending
on the number of classes. The filing fees shown here are the minimum fees associated
with this information collection.
Table 4 calculates the filing fees associated with this collection of information:
Table 4: Filing Fees – Non-hour Cost Burden for Substantive Submissions Made During
Prosecution of the Trademark Application
Item

Responses
(yr)
(a)

Filing fee*
($)
(b)

Total Non-Hour
Cost Burden
(yr)
(a) x (b)
(c)

Trademark/Service Mark Allegation of Use (Amendment to Allege
Use/Statement of Use)

10,475

$100.00

$1,047,500.00

TEAS Trademark/Service Mark Allegation of Use (Amendment to Allege
Use/Statement of Use)

54,992

$100.00

$5,499,200.00

Request for Extension of Time to File a Statement of Use

10,211

$150.00

$1,531,650.00

117,429

$150.00

$17,614,350.00

Petition to Revive Abandoned Application – Failure to Respond Timely to
Office Action

2,004

$100.00

$200,400.00

TEAS Petition to Revive Abandoned Application – Failure to Respond Timely
to Office Action

8,015

$100.00

$801,500.00

Petition to Revive Abandoned Application – Failure to File Timely Statement
of Use or Extension Request

2,004

$100.00

$200,400.00

TEAS Petition to Revive Abandoned Application – Failure to File Timely
Statement of Use or Extension Request

8,015

$100.00

$801,500.00

194

$0.00

$0.00

TEAS Request to Delete Section 1(b) Basis, Intent to Use

1,100

$0.00

$0.00

Request for Express Abandonment (Withdrawal) of Application

4,686

$0.00

$0.00

TEAS Request for Express Abandonment (Withdrawal) of Application

6,500

$0.00

$0.00

Request to Divide

1,990

$100.00

$199,000.00

500

$100.00

$50,000.00

TEAS Request for Extension of Time to File a Statement of Use

Request to Delete Section 1(b) Basis, Intent to Use

Other Petitions
Total

228,115

- - - - -

$27,945,500.00

*Note: All fees listed are based on a per class filing.

Applicants and registrants incur postage costs when submitting non-electronic
information to the USPTO by mail through the United States Postal Service. The

9

USPTO estimates that the majority of submissions for these paper forms are made via
first class mail. First class postage is 42 cents. Therefore, a total estimated mailing
cost of $13,468 is incurred for this collection.
Table 5 calculates the postage costs for the substantive submissions made during
prosecution of the trademark application:
Table 5: Postage Costs for Substantive Submissions Made During Prosecution of the Trademark
Application
Item

Responses
(yr)
(a)

Postage Costs
(b)

Total Cost
(yr)
(a) x (b)

Trademark/Service Mark Allegation of Use (Amendment to Allege
Use/Statement of Use)

10,475

$0.42

$4,400.00

Request for Extension of Time to File a Statement of Use

10,211

$0.42

$4,289.00

Petition to Revive Abandoned Application – Failure to Respond Timely
to Office Action

2,004

$0.42

$842.00

Petition to Revive Abandoned Application – Failure to File Timely
Statement of Use or Extension Request

2,004

$0.42

$842.00

194

$0.42

$81.00

Request for Express Abandonment (Withdrawal) of Application

4,686

$0.42

$1,968.00

Request to Divide

1,990

$0.42

$836.00

500

$0.42

$210.00

32,064

- - - - -

$13,468.00

Request to Delete Section 1(b) Basis, Intent to Use

Other Petitions
Total

In sum, the total annual non-hour cost burden for this collection in the form of filing fees
($27,945,500) and postage costs ($13,468) amounts to $27,958,968.
14.

Annual Cost to the Federal Government

The USPTO estimates that it takes the combined efforts of a GS-5, step 5 and a GS-7,
step 5 employee between 11 and 14 minutes to process the allegations of use and the
requests for extensions of time to file a statement of use. The direct rate of pay for
contractor data entry/processing is $17.24 (equivalent to a GS-5, step 5) and $21.36
(equivalent to a GS-7, step 5). The combined efforts of a GS-5, step 5 and a GS-7, step
5 results in a direct rate of pay of $19.30. When 30% is added to account for a fully
loaded hourly rate (benefits and overhead), the cost per hour for these contractors is
$19.30 + $5.79, for a rate of $25.09.
The USPTO estimates that it takes six USPTO employees at the following rates
between 1 and 5 minutes to process the petitions to revive and 14 minutes to process
the “other petitions”: two at GS-12, step 2; one at GS-12, step 5; and three at GS-11,
step 4. The current hourly rate for a GS-12, step 2 is $34.54 for a total of $69.08 per
hour for two employees. The current hourly rate for a GS-12, step 5 is $37.89, while the

10

current hourly rate for a GS-11, step 4 is $30.68, totaling $92.04 per hour for three
employees. Adding the total hourly rates of $69.08, $37.89, and $92.04 amounts to a
total of $199.01, which in turn results in an average hourly rate of $33.17 for the six
employees processing the petitions to revive and the “other petitions.” When 30% is
added to account for a fully loaded hourly rate (benefits and overhead), the combined
cost per hour for a GS-12, step 2, GS-12, step 5, and GS-11, step 4 is $33.17 + $9.95,
for a rate of $43.12.
Requests to delete section 1(b) filing basis are expected to take between 2 and 5
minutes to process and requests to abandon an application are expected to take
between 1 and 5 minutes to process by contractors retained by the USPTO at an hourly
rate equivalent to the average hourly rate that would be paid to GS-4, step 4 and GS-5,
step 4 employees. The current hourly rates for GS-4, step 4 and GS-5, step 4
employees are $14.96 and $16.73, respectively. Based on these rates, the USPTO
estimates that the average hourly rate for the contractors processing these documents
is $15.85. When 30% is added to account for a fully loaded hourly rate (benefits and
overhead), the cost per hour for these contractors is $15.85 + $4.76, for a rate of
$20.61.
The USPTO estimates that it takes a GS-5, step 5 four minutes to process the request
to divide. The direct rate of pay for contractor data entry/processing is $17.24
(equivalent to a GS-5, step 5). When 30% is added to account for a fully loaded hourly
rate (benefits and overhead), the cost per hour for these contractors is $17.24+ $5.17,
for a rate of $22.41.
Table 6 calculates the processing hours and costs of this information collection to the
Federal Government:
Table 6: Burden Hour/Burden Cost to the Federal Government for Substantive Submissions Made
During Prosecution of the Trademark Application
Item

Hours
(a)

Responses
(yr)
(b)

Burden
(hrs/yr)
(c)
(a) x (b)

Rate
($/hr)
(d)

Total Cost
($/hr)
(e)
(c) x (d)

Trademark/Service Mark Allegation of Use
(Amendment to Allege Use/Statement of Use)

0.23

10,475

2,409

$25.09

$60,442.00

TEAS Trademark/Service Mark Allegation of Use
(Amendment to Allege Use/Statement of Use)

0.18

54,992

9,899

$25.09

$248,366.00

Request for Extension of Time to File a Statement of
Use

0.23

10,211

2,349

$25.09

$58,936.00

TEAS Request for Extension of Time to File a
Statement of Use

0.18

117,429

21,137

$25.09

$530,327.00

Petition to Revive Abandoned Application – Failure to
Respond Timely to Office Action

0.08

2,004

160

$43.12

$6,899.00

TEAS Petition to Revive Abandoned Application –
Failure to Respond Timely to Office Action

0.02

8,015

160

$43.12

$6,899.00

11

Petition to Revive Abandoned Application – Failure to
File Timely Statement of Use or Extension Request

0.08

2,004

160

$43.12

$6,899.00

TEAS Petition to Revive Abandoned Application –
Failure to File Timely Statement of Use or Extension
Request

0.02

8,015

160

$43.12

$6,899.00

Request to Delete Section 1(b) Basis, Intent to Use

0.08

194

16

$20.61

$330.00

TEAS Request to Delete Section 1(b) Basis, Intent to
Use

0.03

1,100

33

$20.61

$680.00

Request for Express Abandonment (Withdrawal) of
Application

0.08

4,686

375

$20.61

$7,729.00

TEAS Request for Express Abandonment (Withdrawal)
of Application

0.02

6,500

130

$20.61

$2,679.00

Request to Divide

0.07

1,990

139

$22.41

$3,115.00

Other Petitions

0.23

500

115

$43.12

$4,959.00

228,115

37,242

- - - - -

$945,159.00

Total

15.

- - - - -

Reason for Change in Burden

Summary of Changes Since the Previous Renewal
This information collection was approved by OMB in November of 2005 with a total of
183,710 responses and 29,174 burden hours per year. With this renewal, the USPTO
estimates that the responses will be 228,115 and the burden hours 34,684, which is an
increase of 44,405 responses and 5,510 burden hours from the currently approved
burden for this collection.
The USPTO estimates that the total annual (non-hour) cost burden will increase by
$5,066,306 for this renewal, from $22,892,662 currently reported on the OMB inventory
to the present $27,958,968 per year.
Change in Respondent Cost Burden
In 2005, the estimated hourly rate for attorneys was $286. Using that rate, the reported
burden hours yielded a respondent cost burden of $8,343,764. This renewal reports an
estimated hourly rate of $310 for a respondent cost burden of $10,752,040, an increase
of $2,408,276.
Changes in Response and Burden Hours
With this renewal, the number of responses increased by 44,405, from 183,710 to
228,115 and the burden hours increased by 5,510, from 29,174 to 34,684 per year. The
increase in burden hours is due to a revised number of estimated submissions as an
administrative adjustment, as follows:

12

•

The USPTO believes that the number of Trademark/Service Mark Allegations of
Use (Amendments to Allege Use/Statements of Use) submitted per year will
decrease by 2,018 responses, from 12,493 to 10,475.
Therefore, this
submission takes a burden decrease of 443 hours as an administrative
adjustment.

•

The USPTO believes that the number of TEAS Trademark/Service Mark
Allegations of Use (Amendments to Allege Use/Statements of Use) submitted per
year will increase by 5,020 responses, from 49,972 to 54,992. Therefore, this
submission takes a burden increase of 904 hours as an administrative
adjustment.

•

The USPTO believes that the number of Requests for Extension of Time to File a
Statement of Use submitted per year will decrease by 10,021 responses, from
20,232 to 10,211. Therefore, this submission takes a burden decrease of
1,703 hours as an administrative adjustment.

•

The USPTO believes that the number of TEAS Requests for Extension of Time
to File a Statement of Use submitted per year will increase by 36,502 responses,
from 80,927 to 117,429. Therefore, this submission takes a burden increase
of 5,475 hours as an administrative adjustment.

•

The USPTO believes that the number of Petitions to Revive Abandoned
Applications – Failure to Respond Timely to an Office Action submitted per year
will increase by 744 responses, from 1,260 to 2,004.
Therefore, this
submission takes a burden increase of 149 hours as an administrative
adjustment.

•

The USPTO believes that the number of TEAS Petitions to Revive Abandoned
Applications – Failure to Respond Timely to an Office Action submitted per year
will increase by 2,975 responses, from 5,040 to 8,015. Therefore, this
submission takes a burden increase of 238 hours as an administrative
adjustment.

•

The USPTO believes that the number of Petitions to Revive Abandoned
Applications – Failure to File Timely Statements of Use or Extension Requests
submitted per year will increase by 744 responses, from 1,260 to 2,004.
Therefore, this submission takes a burden increase of 149 hours as an
administrative adjustment.

•

The USPTO believes that the number of TEAS Petitions to Revive Abandoned
Applications – Failure to File Timely Statements of Use or Extension Requests
submitted per year will increase by 2,975 responses, from 5,040 to 8,015.
Therefore, this submission takes a burden increase of 238 hours as an
administrative adjustment.

13

•

The USPTO believes that the number of Requests to Delete Section 1(b) Basis,
Intent to Use submitted per year will increase by 37 responses, from 157 to 194.
Therefore, this submission takes a burden increase of 3 hours as an
administrative adjustment.

•

The USPTO believes that the number of TEAS Requests to Delete Section 1(b)
Basis, Intent to Use submitted per year will increase by 472 responses, from 628
to 1,100. Therefore, this submission takes a burden increase of 24 hours as
an administrative adjustment.

•

The USPTO believes that the number of Requests for Express Abandonment
(Withdrawal) of Application submitted per year will increase by 3,743 responses,
from 943 to 4,686. Therefore, this submission takes a burden increase of
262 hours as an administrative adjustment.

•

The USPTO believes that the number of TEAS Requests for Express
Abandonment (Withdrawal) of Application submitted per year will increase by
2,728 responses, from 3,772 to 6,500. Therefore, this submission takes a
burden increase of 136 hours as an administrative adjustment.

•

The USPTO believes that the number of Requests to Divide submitted per year
will increase by 1,673 responses, from 317 to 1,990.
Therefore, this
submission takes a burden increase of 134 hours as an administrative
adjustment.

•

The previous submission included an electronic Request to Divide. The USPTO
is proposing to delete that requirement and introduce a TEAS Request to Divide
functionality as part of the existing Allegation of Use and Extension Requests
forms in the near future as well as a stand-alone request to divide form at a later
point. Therefore, this collection takes a burden decrease of 89 hours as a
program change.

•

The USPTO believes that the number of Other Petitions submitted per year will
increase by 100 responses, from 400 to 500. Therefore, this submission takes
a burden increase of 33 hours as an administrative adjustment.

A total of 5,599 burden hours have been added to this collection due to
administrative adjustments. This increase is offset by a decrease of 89 hours due
to a program change. Therefore, this results in a total net burden hour increase
of 5,510.
Changes in Annualized (Non-hour) Cost Burden
For this renewal, the USPTO estimates that the total annual non-hour costs will
increase by $5,066,306, from $22,892,662 currently reported on the OMB inventory to
the present $27,958,968 per year due to the adjustments in estimated responses and

14

postage rates. Therefore, this collection has an increase in annualized (non-hour)
cost burden of $5,066,306 as an administrative adjustment.
[Note: The previously approved estimate of $22,892,662 in annual (non-hour) costs for
this collection is listed as $22,893,000 in the current inventory system. The $338
difference is due to rounding the estimate to the nearest thousand dollars in order to
accommodate the legacy inventory system. This rounded figure was carried over when
the legacy data was migrated to the current inventory system. Consequently, the annual
cost burden increase of $5,066,306 for this collection that is due to administrative
adjustments is displayed as an increase of $5,065,968 ($5,192,868 in administrative
adjustments offset by a program decrease of $126,900) in the current inventory system
in order to compensate for the previously rounded figure and to result in the new annual
cost burden of $27,958,968 for this collection as described above.]

16.

Project Schedule

There is no plan to publish this information for statistical use.
17.

Display of Expiration Date of OMB Approval

The forms in this information collection will display the OMB Control Number and the
date on which OMB’s approval of this information collection expires.
18.

Exception to the Certificate Statement

This collection of information does not include any exceptions to the certificate
statement.

B.

COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS

This collection of information does not employ statistical methods.

15

References
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.

USPTO Information Quality Guidelines
Trademark/Service Mark Allegation of Use (Amendment to Allege Use/Statement of
Use) (Form 1553)
TEAS Trademark/Service Mark Allegation of Use (Amendment to Allege Use/Statement
of Use) (Form 1553)
Request for Request for Extension of Time to File a Statement of Use (Form 1581)
TEAS Request for Request for Extension of Time to File a Statement of Use (Form
1581)
TEAS Petition to Revive Abandoned Application – Failure to Respond Timely to Office
Action (Form 2194)
Petition to Revive Abandoned Application – Failure to File Timely Statement of Use or
Extension Request (Form 2195)
TEAS Request to Delete Section 1(b) Basis, Intent to Use (Form 2200)
TEAS Request for Express Abandonment (Withdrawal) of Application (Form 2202)

16