United States Patent and Trademark Office
Seal of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
|Headquarters||Alexandria, Virginia, U.S.
|Agency executives||Michelle K. Lee, Deputy Director
Margaret A. (Peggy) Focarino, Commissioner for Patents
Deborah Cohn, Commissioner for Trademarks
|Parent agency||U.S. Department of Commerce|
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO or USPTO) is an agency in the U.S. Department of Commerce that issues patents to inventors and businesses for their inventions, and trademark registration for product and intellectual property identification. The USPTO is "unique among federal agencies because it operates solely on fees collected by its users, and not on taxpayer dollars". Its "operating structure is like a business in that it receives requests for services—applications for patents and trademark registrations—and charges fees projected to cover the cost of performing the services [it] provide[s]".
The USPTO is based in Alexandria, Virginia, after a 2005 move from the Crystal City area of neighboring Arlington, Virginia. The offices under Patents and the Chief Information Officer that remained just outside the southern end of Crystal City completed moving to Randolph Square, a brand-new building in Shirlington Village, on April 27, 2009.
The USPTO cooperates with the European Patent Office (EPO) and the Japan Patent Office (JPO) as one of the Trilateral Patent Offices. The USPTO is also a Receiving Office, an International Searching Authority and an International Preliminary Examination Authority for international patent applications filed in accordance with the Patent Cooperation Treaty.
- 1 Mission
- 2 Structure
- 3 Fee diversion
- 4 Patents
- 5 Trademarks
- 6 Representation
- 7 Electronic filing system
- 8 Patent search tools
- 9 Criticisms
- 10 See also
- 11 References and notes
- 12 Further reading
- 13 External links
The USPTO mission is to "maintain a permanent, interdisciplinary historical record of all U.S. patent applications in order to fulfill objectives outlined in the United States Constitution". The legal basis for the United States patent system is Article 1, Section 8, wherein the powers of Congress are defined.
It states, in part:
- "The Congress shall have Power...To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries".
The PTO's mission is to promote "industrial and technological progress in the United States and strengthen the national economy" by:
- Administering the laws relating to patents and trademarks;
- Advising the Secretary of Commerce, the President of the United States, and the administration on patent, trademark, and copyright protection; and
- Providing advice on the trade-related aspects of intellectual property.
The USPTO is headquartered at the Alexandria Campus, consisting of 11 buildings in a city-like development surrounded by ground floor retail and high rise residential buildings between the METRO stations of King Street station and Eisenhower Avenue station where the actual Alexandria Campus is located between Duke Street (on the North) to Eisenhower Avenue (on the South), and between John Carlyle Street (on the East) to Elizabeth Lane (on the West) in Alexandria, Virginia. An additional building in Arlington, Virginia, was opened in 2009.
The USPTO was expected by 2014 to open its first ever satellite offices in Detroit, Dallas, Denver, and Silicon Valley to reduce backlog and reflect regional industrial strengths. The first satellite office opened in Detroit on July 13, 2012. In 2013, due to the budget sequestration, the satellite office for Silicon Valley, which is home to the nation's top patent-producing cities, was put on hold. However, renovation and infrastructure updates continued after the sequestration, and the Silicon Valley location is due to open in San Jose City Hall in mid-2015.
As of September 30, 2009[update], the end of the U.S. government's fiscal year, the PTO had 9,716 employees, nearly all of whom are based at its five-building headquarters complex in Alexandria. Of those, 6,242 were patent examiners (almost all of whom were assigned to examine utility patents; only 99 were assigned to examine design patents) and 388 were trademark examining attorneys; the rest are support staff. While the agency has noticeably grown in recent years, the rate of growth was far slower in fiscal 2009 than in the recent past; this is borne out by data from fiscal 2005 to the present:
|At end of FY||Employees||Patent examiners||Trademark examining attorneys|
Patent examiners make up the bulk of the employees at USPTO. They are generally newly graduated scientists and engineers, recruited from various universities around the nation. They hold degrees in various scientific disciplines, but who do not necessarily hold law degrees. Unlike patent examiners, trademark examiners must be licensed attorneys. All examiners work under a strict, "count"-based production system. For every application, "counts" are earned by composing, filing, and mailing a first office action on the merits, and upon disposal of an application.
The Commissioner for Patents oversees three main bodies, headed by former Deputy Commissioner for Patent Operations, currently Peggy Focarino, the Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, currently[when?] Andrew Hirshfeld as Acting Deputy, and finally the Commissioner for Patent Resources and Planning, which is currently[when?] vacant. The Patent Operations of the office is divided into nine different technology centers that deal with various arts.
Prior to 2012, decisions of patent examiners may be appealed to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, an administrative law body of the USPTO. Decisions of the BPAI could further be appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, or a civil suit may be brought against the Commissioner of Patents in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. The United States Supreme Court may ultimately decide on a patent case. Similarly, decisions of trademark examiners may be appealed to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, with subsequent appeals directed to the Federal Circuit, or a civil action may also be brought.
In recent years, the USPTO has seen increasing delays between when a patent application is filed and when it issues. To address its workload challenges, the USPTO has undertaken an aggressive program of hiring and recruitment. The USPTO hired 1,193 new patent examiners in Fiscal Year 2006 (year ending September 30, 2006), 1,215 new examiners in fiscal 2007, and 1,211 in fiscal year 2008. The USPTO expected to continue hiring patent examiners at a rate of approximately 1,200 per year through 2012; however, due to a slowdown in new application filings since the onset of the late-2000s economic crisis, and projections of substantial declines in maintenance fees in coming years, the agency imposed a hiring freeze in early March 2009.
In 2006, USPTO instituted a new training program for patent examiners called the "Patent Training Academy". It is an eight-month program designed to teach new patent examiners the fundamentals of patent law, practice and examination procedure in a college-style environment. Because of the impending USPTO budget crisis previously alluded to, it had been rumored that the Academy would be closed by the end of 2009. Focarino, then Acting Commissioner for Patents, denied in a May 2009 interview that the Academy was being shut down, but stated that it would be cut back because the hiring goal for new examiners in fiscal 2009 was reduced to 600. Ultimately, 588 new patent examiners were hired in fiscal year 2009.
For many years, Congress has "diverted" about 10% of the fees that the USPTO collected into the general treasury of the United States. In effect, this took money collected from the patent system to use for the general budget. This fee diversion has been generally opposed by patent practitioners (e.g., patent attorneys and patent agents), inventors, the USPTO, as well as former federal judge Paul R. Michel. These stakeholders would rather use the funds to improve the patent office and patent system, such as by implementing the USPTO's 21st Century Strategic Plan. The last six annual budgets of the George W. Bush administration did not propose to divert any USPTO fees, and the first budget of the Barack Obama administration continues this practice; however, stakeholders continue to press for a permanent end to fee diversion.
- On July 31, 1790, the first U.S. patent was issued to Samuel Hopkins for an improvement "in the making of Pot ash and Pearl ash by a new Apparatus and Process". This patent was signed by then President George Washington.
- The X-Patents (the first 10,280 issued between 1790 and 1836) were destroyed by a fire; fewer than 3,000 of those have been recovered and re-issued with numbers that include an "X". The X generally appears at the end of the numbers hand-written on full-page patent images; however, in patent collections and for search purposes, the X is considered to be the patent type – analogous to the "D" of design patents – and appears at the beginning of the number. The X distinguishes the patents from those issued after the fire, which began again with patent number 1.
- Each year, the PTO issues over 150,000 patents to companies and individuals worldwide. As of December 2011[update], the PTO has granted 8,743,423 patents and has received 16,020,302 applications.
The USPTO examines applications for trademark registration. If approved, the trademarks are registered on either the Principal Register or the Supplemental Register, depending upon whether the mark meets the appropriate distinctiveness criteria. However, this function is declining in popularity as trademark applicants move to cheaper, more straightforward state-by-state registrations.
The PTO only allows certain qualified persons to practice before the PTO. Practice includes filing of patent applications on behalf of inventors, prosecuting patent applications on behalf of inventors, and participating in administrative appeals and other proceedings before the PTO examiners and boards. The PTO sets its own standards for who may practice and requires that any person who practices become registered. A patent agent is a person who has passed the USPTO registration examination (the "patent bar") but has not passed any state bar exam to become a licensed attorney; a patent attorney is a person who has passed both a state bar and the patent bar and is in good standing as an attorney. A patent agent can only act in a representative capacity in patent matters presented to the USPTO, and may not represent a patent holder or applicant in a court of law. To be eligible for taking the patent bar exam, a candidate must possess a degree in "engineering or physical science or the equivalent of such a degree".
The United States allows any citizen from any country to sit for the patent bar (if he/she has the requisite technical background). Only Canada has a reciprocity agreement with the United States that confers upon a patent agent similar rights.
An unrepresented inventor may file a patent application and prosecute it on his or her own behalf (pro se). If it appears to a patent examiner that an inventor filing a pro se application is not familiar with the proper procedures of the Patent Office, the examiner may suggest that the filing party obtain representation by a registered patent attorney or patent agent. The patent examiner cannot recommend a specific attorney or agent, but the Patent Office does post a list of those who are registered.
While the inventor of a relatively simple-to-describe invention may well be able to produce an adequate specification and detailed drawings, there remains language complexity in what is claimed, either in the particular claim language of a utility application, or in the manner in which drawings are presented in a design application. There is also skill required when searching for prior art that is used to support the application and to prevent applying for a patent for something that may be unpatentable. A patent examiner will make special efforts to help pro se inventors understand the process but the failure to adequately understand or respond to an Office action from the USPTO can endanger the inventor's rights, and may lead to abandonment of the application.
Electronic filing system
The USPTO accepts patent applications filed in electronic form. Inventors or their patent agents/attorneys can file applications as Adobe PDF documents. Filing fees can be paid by credit card or by a USPTO "deposit account".
Patent search tools
The USPTO's free distribution service only distributes the patent documents as a set of TIFF files. Numerous free and commercial services provide patent documents in other formats, such as Adobe PDF and CPC.
||This article's Criticism or Controversy section may compromise the article's neutral point of view of the subject. (October 2013)|
The USPTO has been criticized for granting patents for impossible or absurd, already known, or arguably obvious inventions.
- U.S. Patent 5,443,036, "Method of exercising a cat", covers having a cat chase the beam from a laser pointer. The patent has been criticized as being obvious.
- U.S. Patent 6,004,596, "Sealed crustless sandwich", issued in 1999, covers the design of a sandwich with crimped edges. However, all claims of the patent were subsequently canceled by the PTO upon reexamination.
- U.S. Patent 6,025,810, "Hyper-light-speed antenna", an antenna that sends signals faster than the speed of light. According to the description in the patent, "The present invention takes a transmission of energy, and instead of sending it through normal time and space, it pokes a small hole into another dimension, thus, sending the energy through a place which allows transmission of energy to exceed the speed of light."
- U.S. Patent 6,368,227, "Method of swinging on a swing", issued April 9, 2002, was granted to a seven-year-old boy, whose father, a patent attorney, wanted to demonstrate how the patent system worked to his son who was five years old at the time of the application. The PTO initially rejected it due to prior art, but eventually issued the patent. However, all claims of the patent were subsequently canceled by the PTO upon reexamination.
- U.S. Patent 6,960,975, "Space vehicle propelled by the pressure of inflationary vacuum state", describes an anti-gravity device. In November 2005, the USPTO was criticized by physicists for granting it. The journal Nature first highlighted this patent issued for a device that presumably amounts to a perpetual motion machine, defying the laws of physics. The device comprises a particular electrically superconducting shield and electromagnetic generating device. The examiner allowed the claims because the design of the shield and device was novel and not obvious. In situations such as this where a substantial question of patentability is raised after a patent issues, the Commissioner of the Patent Office can order a reexamination of the patent.
- Dell, covering "custom manufacture of computer hardware for use in data centers and mega-scale computing environments for others", was allowed by a trademark attorney on July 8, 2008. Cloud computing is a generic term that could define technology infrastructure for years to come, which had been in general use at the time of the application. The application was rejected on August 12, 2008, as descriptive and generic. , "Cloud Computing" for
- Netbook" for Psion, covering "laptop computers" was registered on November 21, 2000. Although the company discontinued the netBook line in November 2003 and allowed the trademark to become genericized through use by journalists and vendors (products marketed as 'netbooks' include the Dell Inspiron Mini Series, Asus eeePC, HP Mini 1000, MSI Wind Netbook and others), USPTO subsequently rejected a number of trademarks citing a "likelihood of confusion" under section 2(d), including 'G NETBOOK' ( rejected October 31, 2008), MSI's 'WIND NETBOOK' ( ) and Coby Electronics' 'COBY NETBOOK' ( ) rejected January 13, 2009. Psion also delivered a batch of cease-and-desist letters on December 23, 2008, relating to the genericized trademark. , "
Slow patent examination and backlog
The USPTO has been criticized for taking an inordinate amount of time in examining patent applications. This is particularly true in the fast-growing area[dated info] of business method patents. As of 2005, patent examiners in the business method area were still examining patent applications filed in 2001.
The delay was attributed by spokesmen for the Patent Office to a combination of a sudden increase in business method patent filings after the 1998 State Street Bank decision, the unfamiliarity of patent examiners with the business and financial arts (e.g., banking, insurance, stock trading etc.), and the issuance of a number of controversial patents (e.g., U.S. Patent 5,960,411 "Amazon one click patent") in the business method area.
Effective August 2006, the USPTO introduced an accelerated patent examination procedure in an effort to allow inventors a speedy evaluation of an application with a final disposition within twelve months. The procedure requires additional information to be submitted with the application and also includes an interview with the examiner. The first accelerated patent was granted on March 15, 2007, with a six-month issuance time.
As of the end of 2008, there were 1,208,076 patent applications pending at the Patent Office. At the end of 1997, the number of applications pending was 275,295. Therefore, over those eleven years there was a 439% increase in the number of pending applications.
December 2012 data showed that there was 597,579 unexamined patent application backlog. During the four years since 2009, more than 50% reduction was achieved. First action pendency was reported as 19.2 months.
Telework program fraud allegations
In 2012, the USPTO initiated an internal investigation into allegations of fraud in the telework program, which allowed employees to work from home. Investigators discovered that some patent examiners had lied about the hours they had worked, but high level[further explanation needed] prevented access to computer records, thus limiting the number of employees who could be punished.
|Directors of the USPTO|
|1. List of persons who have headed the United States Patent Office|
|r. Bruce Lehman (1993–1998)|
|s. Q. Todd Dickinson (1998–2001)|
|t. James E. Rogan (December 2001 – 2004)|
|u. Jon Dudas (2004–January 2009)|
|v. John J. Doll (January 2009–August 2009) (acting)|
|w. David J. Kappos (August 2009–February 2013)|
|x. Teresa Stanek Rea (February 2013–November 21, 2013) (acting)|
|y. Margaret A. (Peggy) Focarino (November 21, 2013 – January 12, 2014) (by delegation)|
|z. Michelle K. Lee (January 13, 2014 – present) (acting)|
- Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI)
- Confederate Patent Office
- 1877 U.S. Patent Office fire
- 1836 U.S. Patent Office fire
- Electronic Filing System (USPTO)
- Ex Parte Quayle
- Google Patents
- History of United States patent law
- Invention Secrecy Act
- NASA spinoff
- National Inventors Hall of Fame
- Old Patent Office Building
- Patent office
- Patent Office Professional Association (POPA)
- John Ruggles
- Science and technology in the United States
- Technological history of the United States
- Term of patent in the United States
- Timeline of United States discoveries
- Timeline of United States inventions
- Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB)
- Trilateral Patent Offices
- United States patent law
- Yankee ingenuity
References and notes
- Bohle, Shannon (February 2014). "A Four Part Series on Open Notebook Science (Part 4)". Nature.com. Archived from the original on 19 February 2014. Retrieved 19 February 2014.
- "USPTO 2014-2018 Strategic Plan". United States Patent and Trademark Office. February 2014. Archived from the original on 22 January 2014. Retrieved 19 February 2014.
- "U.S. Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker Names Michelle K. Lee as Next Deputy Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office". uspto.gov. USPTO. December 11, 2013. Retrieved 29 January 2014.
- "The United States Constitution". The U.S. National Archives. January 2014. Archived from the original on 19 February 2014. Retrieved 19 February 2014.
- USPTO Campus
- USPTO Alexandia Campus map #1
- USPTO Alexandia Campus map #2
- Silicon Valley wins in securing U.S. patent office
- "Patent Reform Act of 2011 Amendment" (pdf). Congressional Record 112th Congress (2011-2012). Retrieved March 5, 2011.
- "USPTO to Open First Ever Satellite Office in Detroit" (pdf) (Press release). U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. December 16, 2010. Retrieved July 14, 2012.
- Anders, Melissa (July 13, 2012). "Detroit beats Silicon Valley in opening first-ever patent office outside Washington, D.C.". MLive.com. Retrieved July 13, 2012.
- Markowitz, Eric (March 1, 2012). "What Does a Patent Office Mean For Detroit?". Inc.com. Retrieved July 10, 2012.
- Associated Press (July 11, 2012). "Patent office prepares to open Detroit location". The Detroit News (Detroit, Michigan). Retrieved July 11, 2012.
- Associated Press. "Silicon Valley Patent Office Shelved".
- The Silicon Valley Office
- "USPTO Performance and Accountability Report Fiscal Year 2009" (PDF). United States Patent and Trademark Office. p. 140. Retrieved 2010-01-16.
- "1705 Examiner Docket, Time, and Activity Recordation [R-5] - 1700 Miscellaneous". United States Patent and Trademark Office. Retrieved 2010-01-29.
- "Executive Biography for Margaret A. Focarino". United States Patent and Trademark Office. Retrieved 2012-01-12.
- "Patent Organization". United States Patent and Trademark Office. Retrieved 2010-01-29.
- "Office of the Commissioner for Patents". United States Patent and Trademark Office. December 30, 2009. Retrieved 2010-01-29.
- 35 U.S.C. § 145.
- PTAB Submissions Have Commenced, USPTO Blog, Director's Forum, September 18, 2012
- "Patent Performance for the year 2006". United States Patent and Trademark Office.
- "USPTO Performance and Accountability Report Fiscal Year 2007" (PDF). United States Patent and Trademark Office. Retrieved 2009-04-23.
- "USPTO Performance and Accountability Report Fiscal Year 2008" (PDF). United States Patent and Trademark Office. Retrieved 2009-04-23.
- Crouch, Dennis (April 12, 2009). "Economic Downturn => Downturn in Patent Filings". Patently-O. Retrieved 2009-04-13.
- Quinn, Gene (March 23, 2009). "Patent Academy Closing, USPTO Budget Crisis Deepening?". IPWatchdog. Retrieved 2009-04-13.
- Quinn, Gene (March 2, 2009). "PTO Hiring Freeze and Budget Problems". IPWatchdog. Retrieved 2009-04-13.
- USPTO Annual Report 2006, The Nature of the Training Provided to USPTO Examiners
- Quinn, Gene (May 12, 2009). "An Interview with the Acting Commissioner for Patents". IPWatchdog. Retrieved 2009-05-24.
- "USPTO Performance and Accountability Report Fiscal Year 2009" (PDF). United States Patent and Trademark Office. p. 14. Retrieved 2010-01-16.
- "President's proposed budget ends USPTO fee diversion in FY 2005" (Press release). United States Patent and Trademark Office. February 2, 2004. Retrieved 2006-11-24.
- Interview With Chief Judge Paul R. Michel On US Patent Reform, Intellectual Property Watch, July 19, 2011. Consulted on August 8, 2011.
- "Strategic Plan for the 21st Century". United States Patent and Trademark Office. February 24, 2006. Retrieved 2006-11-24.
- Zuhn, Donald (May 20, 2009). "Docs at BIO: Panel Offers Suggestions for Fixing the USPTO -- Updated". PatentDocs.org. Retrieved 2009-05-24.
- "U.S. Patent Activity Calendar Years 1790 to the Present". United States Patent and Trademark Office. December 12, 2012. Retrieved 2012-12-12.
- "State Trademark Information". FindLaw For Small Business. February 11, 2008. Retrieved 2008-02-11.
- "Trademark Electronic Search System (TESS)". United States Patent and Trademark Office. February 11, 2008. Retrieved 2008-02-11. Note: click on "Trademarks" then click on "TESS" tab.
- "General Information Concerning Patents: Attorneys and Agents". United States Patent and Trademark Office. Retrieved 2010-01-29.
- Code of Federal Regulations, Title 37, Chapter I, Part 11, Section 11.7
- "Decision on Petition Under 37 C.F.R. § 10.2(c)" (PDF). May 9, 2003. Retrieved 2010-01-29.
- Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, Chapter 400
- "Patent Attorney/Agent Search". Office of Enrollment and Discipline, United States Patent and Trademark Office. Retrieved 2011-10-17.
- Nowotarski, Mark, “Searching the USPTO patent database”, Insurance IP Bulletin, February 2012
- Patent Full-Page Images
- Philip E. Ross, Patently Absurd, Forbes.com, May 29, 2000.
- Hal H. Varian (October 21, 2004). "Patent Protection Gone Awry". The New York Times.
- Lauren Weinstein (October 21, 2002). "Stop the Patent Process Madness". Wired News.
- Sara Schaefer Muñoz (April 5, 2005). "Patent No. 6,004,596: Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwich". The Wall Street Journal.
- Reexamination certificate no. US 6,004,596 C1, September 25, 2007, retrieved from USPTO Public Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR), December 1, 2008 (request PAIR entry for Reexamination Control Number 90/005949 as "Application Number").
- U.S. Patent 6,025,810, col. 1, lines 30-34.
- Jeff Hecht (April 17, 2002). "Boy takes swing at US patents". New Scientist.
- Teresa Riordan (May 13, 2002). "Patents; The Patent Office faces huge backlogs, extremely technical inventions, and absurd ones.". The New York Times.
- Reexamination certificate no. US 6,368,227 C1, July 1, 2003, retrieved from USPTO Public Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR), August 22, 2008
- Ball, Philip (November 10, 2005). "Antigravity craft slips past patent officers". Nature 438 (7065): 139. doi:10.1038/438139a. PMID 16280998.
- United Press International (2005). "Patent issued for anti-gravity device". Phyorg.com. Retrieved 2006-11-24.
- Brian Handwerk (November 11, 2005). "Antigravity Machine Patent Draws Physicists' Ire". National Geographic News. Retrieved 2006-11-24.
- An untraceable link[dead link] was also included here as an additional reference.[broken citation]
- Ramon M Barrera (examiner) (June 7, 2005). "Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)" (PDF). 11/079,670 Space Vehicle Propelled by the Pressure of Inflationary Vacuum State. United States Patent and Trademark Office. p. 2. Retrieved 2014-09-05. Note: Navigate to the 'Image File Wrapper' to find the file; download and open with a PDF reader. The specific passage from the document follows: "The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance: None of the prior art of record taught or disclosed the claimed superconducting shield and electromagnetic field generating means structure."
- Dell Tries to Trademark 'cloud Computing'
- Dell Cloud Computing Trademark Rejected
- A netbook by any other name, or how Psion is going discover you have to use it or lose it[dead link]
- USPTO Accelerated Patent Examination
- USPTO grants first patent under accelerated review option Press Release
- Gene Quinn, How to Fix the USPTO, IPWatchdog, November 21, 2008. Consulted on December 6, 2008.
- http://www.uspto.gov/dashboards/patents/main.dashxml December 2012 Patents Data
- Rein, Lisa. "Patent office filters out worst telework abuses in report to its watchdog". www.washingtonpost.com. The Washington Post. Retrieved 11 August 2014.
- Dobyns, Kenneth W. (November 1994). The Patent Office Pony: A History of the Early Patent Office (1st ed.). Fredericksburg, Virginia: Sergeant Kirkland's Museum and Historical Society. p. 249. ISBN 0-9632137-4-1. ISBN 978-0-9632137-4-7
- Schacht, Wendy H. (January 6, 2011). "U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Appropriations Process: A Brief Explanation". Congressional Research Service. Retrieved April 22, 2011.
- Official website
- USPTO in the Federal Register
- Searches (USPTO)
- Trademark Applications and Registrations Retrieval (TARR) search by trademark serial number or registration number (USPTO)
- Office of Enrollment & Discipline (OED) (USPTO)
- Patent and Trademark Depository Library Program (USPTO)
- Stopfakes.gov Small Business Resources (USPTO)
- Patent Full-Text and Full-Page Image Databases (USPTO)