With increased interest and activity, there is an increased risk of error on the part of the creditor, particularly with respect to the necessary financing statements. This risk is due in large part to the degree of detail required to develop a security interest and the uncertainty as to the location and nature of registration as a result of federal pre-purchase issues. While the case law suggests that perfection by the USPTO is not necessary for trademarks and services, patent law is clear that 35.C. assignment) anticipates the rules of state priority for buyers. See e.g.B. Rhone-Poulence Agro, S.A. v. DeKalb Genetics Corp., 284 F.3d 1323 (Fed. Cir.

2002) (indicating that a secured creditor should register its patent security interests with the USPTO in order to improve against a good faith buyer); In re Transp. Design – Tech., Inc., 48 B.R. 635, 639 (Bankr.C.D. callus. 1985) (by asserting that a good faith buyer who registered his transfer of ownership to the USPTO will win the interests of an insured party who does not denounce his security interest with the USPTO). The cost of registering IP KURZform security agreements can change regularly, so it`s best to check current pricing plans before registering an agreement. The current patent and trademark pricing plan is available on the USPTO website under the “Office of Finance” (www.uspto.gov/about/offices/cfo/finance/fees.jsp) section and the current copyright pricing plan is available by clicking on the homepage of the USCO website (www.copyright.gov/docs/fees.html). Given preventive patent legislation, a creditor who takes trademarks or service marks as collateral may one day see a court use a pre-regulatory patent procedure to set guidelines for securitization of trademarks.

Therefore, if a party attempts to assert that the failure to file the USPTO for a mark or service mark leads to ineffective perfection, that party may defend its position by referring to patent cases. The argument may sound like this: (1) the relevant paragraphs of the Patent Act and the Trademark Act are virtually identical; (2) there is simply no case law dealing with this issue in the area of the trademark; and (3) Since the Patent and Trademark Office handles both patent and trademark documents, the internal workings of this management authority are the same. The party would then conclude that patent cases should be controlled, which would render ineffective a safety interest related to the trademark that is not subject to the USPTO. Fortunately, filing trademarks and services with the USPTO will avoid the potential risk. Note that unlike trademarks and patents, an application to the USCO is required to enhance a security interest in registered copyrights. The federal copyright law is being emphasized by the fact that it specifically deals with a detailed method of collecting and transferring interest in registered copyright.