Should the USPTO have law enforcement power?

Emil J Ali, partner at McCabe Ali, agrees with this sentiment. He claims that the USPTO has “not even-handedly utilised the enforcement that they have”, adding: “In fact, they have already exceeded [their current] authority by cancelling patents and trademarks – or suspending them after arguments showed their rationale was not appropriate. In essence, only the client/applicant gets hurt with no recourse if they had no involvement in something, and all they sought was Amazon Brand Registry. The USPTO places their applications in purgatory. Allowing the USPTO to go after applicants or filing companies, while noble, would likely not be executed effectively.”

Ali claims that a key reason the USPTO has struggled to tackle fraud is its focus on trademarks originating from China. “We live in an environment where there are fake law firms harming US businesses, but the USPTO has been focused on only Chinese-sourced applications and the agencies or attorneys that work with them,” he says. “While they currently do not have power themselves, some of the ones who impersonate the USPTO can easily be dealt with through trademark litigation. On the other hand, the FTC and State AGs could work with the USPTO to solve these issues. However, a new enforcement regime is just not the right way.”

Read More: https://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/article/should-the-uspto-have-law-enforcement-power