Scam solicitations involving intellectual property notices have plagued trademark and patent owners for many years. As technology and scammer sophistication improve, these schemes are becoming more prevalent and confusing, and a growing international problem. Currently the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is tracking over 50 such scams originating in the U.S. and dozen overseas. Staying vigilant is the best protection.
Typically, these fraudulent solicitations target owners of U.S. registrations and patents. They often provide misleading deadline information, promise to take required actions at exorbitant fees, and/or trick IP owners into paying for useless services.
Case in point, a Latvian citizen was recently sentenced to more than four years in federal prison and ordered to pay over $4.5 million in restitution after pleading guilty to mail fraud in a multi-million-dollar scheme to defraud owners of U.S. trademark registrations. The scheme, announced by the U.S. Department of Justice on September 15, 2021, revolved around Viktors Suhorukovs who established and operated Patent and Trademark Office, LLC, registered in the District of Columbia, and Patent and Trademark Bureau, LLC, registered in New York. These entity names gave U.S. trademark registration owners the false impression that they were, in fact, receiving notices from the USPTO. Through his efforts, Sugorukovs was able to scam more than 2,900 U.S. trademark registrants out of millions of dollars for fake, renewal fees. Unfortunately, this is one of many schemes by domestic and foreign entities that confuse and defraud U.S. IP owners.
An example of one of these fake solicitations is provided below.
In order to avoid being misled by one of these scammers, IP owners should keep in mind the following:
- If you are represented by an attorney at the USPTO or in any foreign jurisdiction, notices should be reported to you by your IP attorney.
- If for some reason you DO receive official correspondence about your IP, it will be from the “United States Patent and Trademark Office” in Alexandria, Virginia, and all emails will be from the domain “@uspto.gov.”
- Read all notices carefully. Do not be fooled by company names that sound like government agencies or offers that contain publicly available government data, or refer to U.S. laws and regulations. Many scammers will use company names that may include terms like “United States,” “U.S.,” “Trademark,” “Patent,” “Registration,” “Office,” or “Agency.” Some offers and notices may include official government data publicly available from USPTO records, or refer to other government agencies and sections of the U.S. Code.
- The USPTO will never ask for your credit card number or social security card over the telephone. If you are represented by an attorney, fees and action will be taken by your attorney who will invoice you or your company for those services.
In summary, if you receive a solicitation, be aware and check with your attorney who can confirm the notice legitimacy in just a few minutes. You can also check the USPTO’s Scam Awareness page which offers helpful links to scam alert information.
- Shareholder
Clients prize John’s wealth of creative ideas for growing and protecting their businesses. Naturally outgoing, he has developed an extensive network of contacts that benefit clients as he advances their interests. John works ...
Subscribe
Recent Posts
- Artificial Ingenuity: Is Generative AI the New 'Person of Ordinary Skill' in Patent Law?
- The Expiration of the After Final Consideration Pilot Program 2.0 (AFCP 2.0)
- Patently Unclear: Why Result-Oriented Claims Don’t Make the Cut Under 35 U.S.C. § 101
- Make Your Invention The Priority, What Track-1 Can Do For You!
- Navigating Final Rejections in Patent Prosecution: AFCP 2.0 vs. 37 CFR § 1.116
- A Clear POV on Patent Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. 101: Contour’s Claims Zoom Back Into Focus in Contour v. GoPro
- Understanding the Recent Federal Circuit Decision in Broadband iTV, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. on Patent Ineligibility
- Federal Circuit Clarifies Obviousness-Type Double Patenting in Allergan v. MSN Laboratories: The Impact of Patent Term Adjustments on First-Filed Patents
- The Risks and Rewards of Using Open Source Software
- Don't Let Your Trade Secrets Walk Out the Door With Your Employees: Patent Them!
Archives
- November 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- October 2022
- August 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- June 2019
- April 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- October 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017