Chinese Trademark Scammers Forging US, Canadian Attorneys' Signatures on USPTO Filings
When a U.S.-based trademark and copyright lawyer sought to find out why his client's trademark application for an app was rejected, he discovered that a Chinese company had filed an application for the same product based on screenshots of his client's app. Then he discovered that the company allegedly used the signature of a Canadian patent agent without her permission.
March 01, 2019 at 03:51 PM
4 minute read
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office recently sounded an alarm about a scheme in which Chinese residents offer to pay U.S. lawyers to use their information in trademark filings, which could constitute the unauthorized practice of law. But in some cases, scammers in China and elsewhere are allegedly using attorneys' signatures in trademark registration filings without permission.
In December, Miriam Paton, a registered Canadian patent agent who also happens to specialize in patent prosecution, filed a declaration with the USPTO after learning that her name and signature had been used in “several hundred trademark applications” in the U.S.
“I do not practice trademark law and have never represented any party in a trademark matter before the USPTO,” wrote Paton. “I have never agreed to serve as a domestic representative for a trademark application before the USPTO and cannot do so because I am a resident of Canada.”
In Washington, D.C., Paton's name appeared on the radar of trademark and copyright attorney Eric Perrott of the Gerben Law Firm while he was investigating the circumstances underlying the USPTO's rejection of a client's trademark application for a mobile app.
The application was rejected because a Chinese company had already filed an application for the same product, according to Perrott. He said he discovered that the company in question had used screenshots of his client's app in the sham application. And then he noticed Paton's signature on the company's trademark paperwork.
“The signature portions of these applications are not easily searchable,” Perrott noted. “So even figuring out who's signing these applications is not easy.”
The number of trademark applications coming out of the Chinese mainland has increased by about 1,100 percent between fiscal years 2013 and 2018, according to the USPTO. The agency has stated that the recent scam involving Chinese residents soliciting U.S. attorneys' information for use in trademark applications “appears to be an attempt to circumvent” a proposed rule to require foreign trademark applicants and registrants to use lawyers licensed in the U.S.
The spike in trademark applications has been connected, at least in part, to a program in which the Chinese government pays companies to register foreign trademarks. Perrott said the payments are about $800, or $525 after deducting filing fees, for each successful trademark registration.
He called the deluge of trademark applications from China “the biggest challenge the [US]PTO has had in at least the last decade, if not more.”
“It's really showing the cracks in the infrastructure of their system,” he said. “There is a lot of trust that people are going to be filing these in good faith.”
And it's not just the U.S. that is dealing with a deluge of trademark applications from China, according to Ying Luo, patent law attorney and partner at Lung Tin in New York.
“This trend of an increase of Chinese companies trademark filing is not really unique for the U.S.; I think it's for everywhere,” she said. “Even in China domestically, trademark applications have also increased a lot.”
“It's the booming of the business and people are paying more and more attention to foreign country filings,” she added.
Read More:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCSX Joins Rest of Big Four Railroad Companies in Installing New Generation of Legal Leadership
'Final Countdown': SEC Launches Nearly 800% Litigation Surge in October
3 minute readRegulatory Upheaval Is Coming. How Businesses Prepare and Respond Will Separate Winners and Losers
As Uncertainty Hovers Over PGA Merger, LIV Golf Hires Entertainment Industry Veteran as Legal Chief
Trending Stories
- 1California Implements New Law Banning Medical Debt From Credit Reports
- 2Trump Picks Personal Criminal Defense Lawyers For Solicitor General, Deputy Attorney General
- 3Climate Groups Demonstrate Outside A&O Shearman and Akin Offices
- 4Republican Who Might Become FTC's Next Chair Blasts Democratic Commissioners' 'All Mergers Are Bad' Mindset
- 5The Law Firm Disrupted: It's Bonus Time
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250