37 C.F.R. § 2.32

Requirements for a complete trademark or service mark application

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The application must be in English and include the following:

(1) A request for registration;

(2) The name, domicile address, and email address of each applicant. If the applicant is a national of a country that has acceded to the Trademark Law Treaty, but not to the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks, the requirement to provide an email address does not apply;

(3)(i) The legal entity type and citizenship of the applicant(s); and

(ii) If the applicant is a corporation, association, partnership or other juristic person, the jurisdiction (usually state or nation) under the laws of which the applicant is organized;

(iii) If the applicant is a domestic partnership, the names and citizenship of the general partners;

(iv) If the applicant is a domestic joint venture, the names and citizenship of the active members of the joint venture; or

(v) If the applicant is a sole proprietorship, the state of organization of the sole proprietorship and the name and citizenship of the sole proprietor.

(4) When the applicant is, or must be, represented by an attorney, as defined in § 11.1 of this chapter, who is qualified to practice under § 11.14 of this chapter, the attorney's name, postal address, email address, and bar information;

(5) One or more bases, as required by § 2.34(a);

(6) A list of the particular goods or services on or in connection with which the applicant uses or intends to use the mark. In a U.S. application filed under section 44 of the Act, the scope of the goods or services covered by the section 44 basis may not exceed the scope of the goods or services in the foreign application or registration;

(7) The international class of goods or services, if known. See § 6.1 of this chapter for a list of the international classes of goods and services.

(8) If the mark is not in standard characters, a description of the mark;

(9) If the mark includes non-English wording, an English translation of that wording; and

(10) If the mark includes non-Latin characters, a transliteration of those characters, and either a translation of the transliterated term in English, or a statement that the transliterated term has no meaning in English.

(b) The application must include a verified statement that meets the requirements of § 2.33.

(d) The application must include the fee required by § 2.6 for each class of goods or services.

(e) For the requirements of a multiple-class application, see § 2.86.

(f) For the requirements of all collective mark applications, see § 2.44.

(g) For the requirements of a certification mark application, see § 2.45.

[64 FR 48918, Sept. 8, 1999, as amended at 73 FR 13784, Mar. 14, 2008; 73 FR 67768, Nov. 17, 2008; 80 FR 33178, June 11, 2015; 84 FR 31511, July 2, 2019; 84 FR 37094, July 31, 2019]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2003–2025 · leading case: In Re Chestek Pllc, 92 F.4th 1105 (Fed. Cir. 2024).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In Re Chestek Pllc, 92 F.4th 1105 (Fed. Cir. 2024). · cites it 7× “Case: 22-1843 Document: 55 Page: 2 Filed: 02/13/2024 2 IN RE: CHESTEK PLLC Chestek PLLC (“Chestek”) appeals from a Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) decision affirming the examiner’s refusal to register the mark CHESTEK LEGAL for failure to comply with the domicile…”

In Re: Cordua Restaurants, Inc., 823 F.3d 594 (Fed. Cir. 2016). ““[B]y expanding or contracting the definition of a ‘genus’ of products, a court can substantially affect the final determination of whether a term is ‘generic.’ ” 2 McCarthy § 12:23.”

Glow Indus., Inc. v. Lopez, 273 F. Supp. 2d 1095 (C.D. Cal. 2003). “See 37 C.F.R. §§ 2.32 , 2.33 (setting forth requirements for trademark applications).”

In Re Chestek Pllc (Fed. Cir. 2024). · cites it 7× “Case: 22-1843 Document: 55 Page: 2 Filed: 02/13/2024 2 IN RE: CHESTEK PLLC Chestek PLLC (“Chestek”) appeals from a Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) decision affirming the examiner’s refusal to register the mark CHESTEK LEGAL for failure to comply with the domicile…”

In Re: Magnesita Refractories Co. (Fed. Cir. 2017). “37 C.F.R. §§ 2.32 (a)(7). International Class 19 relates to “[b]uilding materials (non-metallic); non-metallic rigid pipes for building; asphalt, pitch and bitumen; non- metallic transportable buildings; monuments, not of metal.”

Shandong Shinho Food Indus. Co., Ltd. v. May Flower Int'l, Inc. (E.D.N.Y 2021). “See 37 C.F.R. § 2.32 (a)(9)–(10) (2009) (stating that registrants must submit an English translation of any non- English wording and “[i]f the mark includes non-Latin characters, a transliteration of those characters, and either a translation of the transliterated term in…”

Norris v. Goldner (S.D.N.Y. 2023). “§ 1051 (a)(1); see also 37 C.F.R. § 2.32 (a)(1)(6), an application that is overbroad as to the goods it identifies is not void ab initio.”

In Re Duraisamy (Fed. Cir. 2025). “Decision, 2024 WL 3025989 , at *4; see also 37 C.F.R. § 2.32 (a). Mr. Duraisamy listed his name as the owner but “limited liability Case: 24-2183 Document: 72 Page: 8 Filed: 09/03/2025 8 IN RE: DURAISAMY company” as the legal entity type, and Mr.”

Lumino, Inc. v. Lumi Importing Ltd (W.D. Wis. 2025). “” 37 CFR § 2.32 (a)(6). Relevant here, Lumino’s attorney of record attested that the LUMINO Mark was in use in commerce as to: “drapery hardware, namely, traverse rods, poles, curtain rods and finials” for the ‘549 Registration; and “[c]ellular shades, Venetian blinds, faux wood…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.