USPTO Trademark Fee Adjustment - Delay of Effective Date

81123 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 15, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

Because no general notice of proposed In consideration of the foregoing, 29 Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1301(a), 1302(b)(3), rulemaking is required for this 1341, 1344, 1362. CFR part 4044 is amended as follows: amendment, the Regulatory Flexibility ■ 2. In appendix B to part 4044, add an PART 4044—ALLOCATION OF Act of 1980 does not apply. See 5 U.S.C. entry for ‘‘January–March 2021’’ at the ASSETS IN SINGLE-EMPLOYER 601(2). end of the table to read as follows: PLANS List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 4044 Appendix B to Part 4044—Interest

Rates Used to Value Benefits ■ 1. The authority citation for part 4044 Employee benefit plans, Pension insurance, Pensions. continues to read as follows: * * * * *

The values of i are: tFor valuation dates occurring in the month— i for t = i for t = i for t = t t t *******

January–March 2021 ........................................................ 0.0169 1–20 0.0166 >20 N/A N/A

Rulemaking Requirements authorized by the Leahy-Smith America Issued in Washington, DC, by: Invents Act, as amended by the Study Hilary Duke, A. Administrative Procedure Act: This of Underrepresented Classes Chasing final rule revises the effective date of Assistant General Counsel for Regulatory Engineering and Science Success Act of Affairs, Pension Benefit Guaranty § 2.6(a)(1)(ii). This action relates to the 2018. Those fee changes allow the Corporation. setting or adjusting of trademark fees USPTO to continue to recover the and is a rule of agency practice and [FR Doc. 2020–27377 Filed 12–14–20; 8:45 am] prospective aggregate costs of strategic procedure and/or an interpretive rule BILLING CODE 7709–02–P and operational trademark and pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). See JEM

Broad. Co. v. F.C.C., 22 F.3d 32 (D.C. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Cir. 1994) (‘‘[T]he ‘critical feature’ of the goals (based on workload projections procedural exception [in 5 U.S.C. included in the USPTO fiscal year 2021 Patent and Trademark Office 553(b)(A)] ‘is that it covers agency Congressional Justification), including actions that do not themselves alter the associated administrative costs, and to 37 CFR Part 2 rights or interests of parties, although further USPTO strategic objectives by [they] may alter the manner in which better aligning fees with costs, [Docket No. PTO–T–2019–0027] the parties present themselves or their protecting the integrity of the trademark RIN 0651–AD42 viewpoints to the agency.’ ’’ (quoting register, improving the efficiency of Batterton v. Marshall, 648 F.2d 694, 707 agency processes, and ensuring Trademark Fee Adjustment (D.C. Cir. 1980))); see also Bachow financial sustainability to facilitate Commc’ns Inc. v. F.C.C., 237 F.3d 683, : United States Patent and effective trademark operations. AGENCY690 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (rules governing an Trademark Office, Department of Among the changes in the November application process are procedural Commerce. 17, 2020 final rule, the USPTO amended under the Administrative Procedure : Final rule; delay of effective ACTIONthe fee at 37 CFR 2.6(a)(1)(ii) addressing Act); Inova Alexandria Hosp. v. Shalala, date. applications under section 66(a) of the 244 F.3d 342, 350 (4th Cir. 2001) (rules Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1141f. This for handling appeals were procedural : On November 17, 2020, the SUMMARYfee, paid by international applicants where they did not change the United States Patent and Trademark substantive standard for reviewing designating the United States under the Office (USPTO) published in the claims). Accordingly, prior notice and World Intellectual Property Federal Register a final rule on setting opportunity for public comment are not Organization’s (WIPO) Protocol Relating and adjusting trademark fees that is required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b) or to the Madrid Agreement Concerning scheduled to go into effect on January 2, (c) (or any other law). See Cooper Techs. the International Registration of Marks 2021. This final rule changes the Co. v. Dudas, 536 F.3d 1330, 1336–37 (Madrid Protocol), is set to increase effective date of one fee paid by (Fed. Cir. 2008) (stating that 5 U.S.C. from $400 to $500. international applicants under the 553, and thus 35 U.S.C. 2(b)(2)(B), do Madrid Protocol from January 2, 2021, This final rule delays the effective not require notice and comment to February 18, 2021. date of the change to § 2.6(a)(1)(ii) rulemaking for ‘‘interpretative rules, : The effective date of 37 CFR because the treaty requires three months DATESgeneral statements of policy, or rules of 2.6(a)(1)(ii), amended at 85 FR 73197, advance notice to WIPO, which then agency organization, procedure, or November 17, 2020, is delayed from alerts international applicants, before an practice’’ (quoting 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A)). January 2, 2021, to February 18, 2021. increase in the amount of the Moreover, the Director of the USPTO, : international application/subsequent pursuant to authority at 5 U.S.C. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACTCatherine Cain, Office of the Deputy designation fee can enter into force. On 553(b)(B) and (d)(1), finds good cause to Commissioner for Trademark November 18, 2020, the USPTO adopt the change in this final rule Examination Policy, at 571–272–8946, provided WIPO with the required notice without prior notice and an opportunity or by email at TMPolicy@uspto.gov. of the change to § 2.6(a)(1)(ii). Thus, the for public comment or a 30-day delay in effective date of § 2.6(a)(1)(ii) is delayed : The effectiveness, as such procedures would SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONfrom January 2, 2021, to February 18, be impracticable and contrary to the USPTO published a final rule (85 FR 2021, three months following the public interest. Immediate 73197, Nov. 17, 2020) that set or notification. implementation of the change to the adjusted certain trademark fees, as

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:21 Dec 14, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\15DER1.SGM 15DER1

81124 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 15, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

effective date of § 2.6(a)(1)(ii) is in the intended to enable the Market Dominant statutory objectives and seeking public input. In response to comments rate making system to achieve certain public interest because it will allow the received, the Commission issued a USPTO to meet its obligation under the statutory objectives. revised notice of proposed rulemaking Madrid Protocol to provide three : Effective: January 14, 2021. DATES (Revised NPR) again seeking public months advance notice to WIPO and to : For additional information, ADDRESSES comment on the Commission’s revised international applicants of any changes Order No. 5763 can be accessed proposals. The Commission’s further to international application/subsequent electronically through the Commission’s 4 modifications and responses to public designation fees. A delay of this final website at https://www.prc.gov. comments received from the Revised rule to provide prior notice and : FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NPR are addressed in its final rules. comment procedures and a delay in David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at effectiveness are impracticable because III. Basis and Purpose of Final Rules 202–789–6820. they would allow the change to : Order No. 4257 concluded that while SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION§ 2.6(a)(1)(ii) to go into effect before the the ratemaking system had fulfilled Table of Contents agency has provided WIPO with the some of the PAEA’s goals, the overall required three-month advance notice, I. Relevant Statutory Requirements system had not achieved the statutory thereby defeating the purpose of this II. Background objectives, taking into account the rulemaking. Therefore, the Director III. Basis and Purpose of Final Rules statutory factors. Order No. 4257 at finds there is good cause to waive notice I. Relevant Statutory Requirements 3–4. For ease of organization, the and comment procedures and the 30- Commission’s analysis grouped the The Postal Accountability and day delay in effectiveness for this rule. PAEA’s nine statutory objectives into Enhancement Act (PAEA), directed the B. Regulatory Flexibility Act: As prior 1 three principal areas: (1) The structure Commission to promulgate rules notice and an opportunity for public of the ratemaking system; (2) the establishing a ratemaking system for comment are not required pursuant to 5 financial health of the Postal Service; Market Dominant products within 18 U.S.C. 553 (or any other law), neither a and (3) service. months after the law’s enactment, which Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis nor a For the first principal area, the the Commission did in 2007. See 39 certification under the Regulatory Commission found that the ratemaking U.S.C. 3622(a); Docket No. RM2007–1. Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is system had resulted in predictable and Section 3622(d)(3) of title 39 of the required and none have been prepared. stable rates, in terms of timing and United States Code requires the See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). magnitude (Objective 2); that it had Commission to review the ratemaking C. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory reduced administrative burden and system 10 years after the PAEA’s Planning and Review): This rulemaking increased transparency (Objective 6); enactment to determine if the system has been determined to be not that it had provided the Postal Service has achieved the 9 statutory objectives significant for purposes of Executive with pricing flexibility (Objective 4); as specified by the PAEA, taking into Order 12866 (Sept. 30, 1993). and that it had, on balance, maintained account the 14 statutory factors. 39 D. Executive Order 13771 (Reducing just prices (Objective 8). Id. at 142–145. U.S.C. 3622(b), (c), and (d)(3). After Regulation and Controlling Regulatory However, the Commission found that making its determination that the Costs): This rule is not an Executive the ratemaking system had not ratemaking system did not achieve the Order 13771 regulatory action because increased pricing efficiency (Objective statutory objectives, taking into account this rule is not significant under 1). Id. at 146. For the second principal the statutory factors, the Commission Executive Order 12866 (Jan. 30, 2017). area—the financial health of the Postal began a public rulemaking process to Service—the Commission found that Andrei Iancu, make modifications to the ratemaking while the ratemaking system had been Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual system for Market Dominant products as sufficient to provide for mail security Property and Director of the United States necessary to achieve the objectives and terrorism deterrence (Objective 7); Patent and Trademark Office. pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3622(d)(3). had provided a sufficient mechanism to [FR Doc. 2020–27564 Filed 12–14–20; 8:45 am] allocate institutional costs between II. Background BILLING CODE 3510–16–P Market Dominant products and Pursuant to section 3622(d)(3), the Competitive products (Objective 9); and Commission initiated Docket No. had generally enabled the Postal Service POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION RM2017–3 for the purpose of to achieve short-term financial stability, conducting its 10-year review of the medium- and long-term financial 39 CFR Parts 3030, 3040, 3045, 3050, Market Dominant ratemaking system. In stability had not been achieved and 3055 Order No. 4257, the Commission found 2 (Objective 5). Id. at 247–249. The that in the decade following the PAEA’s [Docket No. RM2017–3; Order No. 5763] Commission also found that cost enactment, the ratemaking system had reductions and operational efficiency System for Regulating Market not achieved the statutory objectives, improvements were not sufficient to Dominant Rates and Classifications taking into account the statutory factors. achieve overall financial stability and Order No. 4257 at 275. On the same day : Postal Regulatory Commission. therefore not maximized (Objective 1). AGENCY that it released its findings, the Id. at 184–194, 221–226. Likewise due : Final rule. Commission issued a notice of proposed ACTION to loss-making products and classes, the rulemaking (NPR), setting forth a : The Commission is adopting Commission found the system did not SUMMARY number of proposed regulatory final rules modifying the system for modifications intended to enable the regulating rates and classifications for Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the System ratemaking system to achieve the 3Market Dominant products. The revised for Regulating Rates and Classes for Market rules incorporate feedback from Dominant Products, December 1, 2017 (Order No. Public Law 109–435, 120 Stat. 3198 (2006). 4258), 82 FR 58280 (December 11, 2017). comments received from the 1 Order on the Findings and Determination of the Revised Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Commission’s prior proposed 2 4 39 U.S.C. 3622 Review, December 1, 2017 (Order December 5, 2019 (Order No. 5337), 84 FR 67685 rulemaking. The rules as adopted are No. 4257). (December 11, 2019).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:21 Dec 14, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\15DER1.SGM 15DER1