Request for Extension of Time to File a Statement of Use — Template

By Casey Scott McKay · 2026-01-15

This template supplies a complete, filable request for a six-month extension of time to file a statement of use in a Section 1(b) intent-to-use application, drafted as the captioned instrument a paralegal can transcribe into Trademark Center and a litigator can later defend. It opens with triage — which files this document fits, and which ones need a statement of use, an amendment to allege use, a request to divide, or a petition to revive instead — and then lists the dates, serial numbers, identifications, signatory facts, and good-cause evidence you need in hand before drafting. The model request covers the caption, the timeliness recital, the goods and services carried forward, the verified statement of continued bona fide intention required by 15 U.S.C. § 1051(d)(2) and 37 C.F.R. § 2.89, a good-cause showing built from dated facts, the fee, and a declaration under 37 C.F.R. § 2.20 with the 18 U.S.C. § 1001 warning. Clause-by-clause notes explain what each paragraph does, the authority behind its wording, and what changes when the facts change. Alternative clauses cover the first request granted as of right, the fifth request at the edge of the thirty-six-month cap, the insurance extension filed alongside a statement of use, partial deletion, regulated-industry delay, and the version for an applicant whose ownership has changed. Filing mechanics cover Trademark Center, the $125-per-class fee, deadline math under 37 C.F.R. § 2.196, proof of transmission, and the four dates that go on the docket the moment the request transmits.

IP and Technology > Trademarks | Form | Published 15 January 2026 - Updated 9 July 2026 | Casey Scott McKay - marksy.us

Summary. A template request to extend your statement of use deadline on an intent-to-use application — drafted as a real captioned instrument, not a contract shell. Start with triage: which files need this document, and which need a statement of use, an amendment to allege use, a request to divide, or a petition to revive instead. Then the intake list — notice of allowance issue date, current period expiration, extension number, the identification exactly as allowed, the signatory's authority, and the dated facts that make up good cause. Then the model request itself: caption, timeliness recital, goods carried forward, the verified statement of continued bona fide intention required by 15 U.S.C. § 1051(d)(2) and 37 C.F.R. § 2.89, the good-cause showing, the fee, and a declaration under 37 C.F.R. § 2.20. Then clause-by-clause notes tying each paragraph to authority, alternatives for the first request and the last one, the insurance extension, partial deletion, and changed ownership — and the four dates that go on the docket the second it transmits.

Keywords: statement of use extension · request for extension of time · 37 cfr 2.89 · 15 usc 1051(d)(2) · notice of allowance deadline · intent-to-use application · continued bona fide intention to use · good cause showing · thirty-six month outer limit · insurance extension request · trademark center filing · verified statement · 37 cfr 2.20 declaration · extension fee per class · deleting goods from an application · request to divide · petition to revive · commodore electronics bona fide intent · sou docketing · itu assignment restriction

Template — not legal advice. Replace every [BRACKETED] field. Marksy is not a law firm; have important filings reviewed by a licensed attorney before they are signed and transmitted.

What this template is, when to use it, and when not to

This is the paper you file when a notice of allowance has issued on a Section 1(b) application, the six-month clock is running, and the mark is not yet in use in commerce on the allowed goods and services. It buys six more months of the filing-date priority you have been holding under 15 U.S.C. § 1057(c), for $125 per class, on a verified statement that you still intend to use the mark.

It is a short instrument that people underestimate. Filed once, carelessly, it costs nothing. Filed five times, carelessly, it becomes the documentary spine of a later attack on the application's bona fide intent — because a challenger's first document request in an opposition asks what the applicant actually did during each extension period, and five identical paragraphs are an answer.

The strategy behind the filing — whether to extend at all, whether to file the statement of use now, whether to delete goods or divide the application — belongs to From Notice of Allowance to Registration. The mechanics of the statement of use itself, including specimens and date-of-use proof, belong to the Statement of Use Filing Checklist. Why the Section 1(b) basis exists and what it costs is in Intent-to-Use Applications. Read those to decide. Read this one to draft.

Use this template when a notice of allowance has issued, the current six-month period has not expired, fewer than five extensions have been granted, the requested period ends no later than thirty-six months after the notice of allowance issued, and the mark is not in use in commerce on at least some of the allowed goods or services.

Do not use it — use something else — when:

| Situation | Why this is the wrong instrument | Instead | |---|---|---| | The mark is already in use on everything allowed | An extension buys nothing and wastes six months of runway you may need later | File the statement of use; Statement of Use Filing Checklist | | The application has not yet been approved for publication | There is no notice of allowance and no clock to extend. Use began early — capture it | Amendment to allege use, 37 C.F.R. § 2.76 | | The application is in the blackout period — approved for publication, no notice of allowance yet | Neither an amendment to allege use nor a statement of use nor an extension may be filed. Wait | From Notice of Allowance to Registration | | The current period already expired | The application is abandoned. An extension request filed late is a nullity | Petition to revive for unintentional delay, 15 U.S.C. § 1051(d)(4); 37 C.F.R. § 2.66 — and the petition must carry the missing filing with it | | You are at or past thirty-six months from the notice of allowance | The cap is statutory. No petition, no diligence showing, and no revival reaches month thirty-seven | Refile; run the Pre-Filing Trademark Application Checklist again first, because three years of intervening filings may now block you | | Use has begun on some classes but not others | Extending everything delays the registrations you could already have | Statement of use plus a request to divide, 37 C.F.R. § 2.87, or delete the unused items | | The USPTO issued an office action on your statement of use | The clock you are on is the response period, not the extension period | Response to Office Action — Template and the Office Action Response Toolkit | | The application is based on § 44(e) or is a § 66(a) extension of protection | No statement of use is required to register on those bases, so there is nothing to extend | The registration issues without proof of use; the use obligation arrives at the § 8 deadline | | The mark is registered and you are proving continued use | Wrong stage entirely | Section 8 Declaration — Template |

The trap that eats goods. An extension request covers only the goods and services it names, and anything covered by neither a statement of use nor a pending extension request is deleted from the application. TMEP § 1108.02(d). Practitioners who paste a stale identification from the original application — rather than the identification as it appears on the face of the notice of allowance, after every amendment the examining attorney required — delete items by accident and discover it two years later. Read Paragraph 3 of the model below against the notice of allowance every single time.

The worked example. Kestrel Diagnostics, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation in Madison, filed Serial No. 98/612,447 for KESTRELIQ in standard characters on 12 April 2024 under § 1(b), in two classes: Class 10, "medical diagnostic instruments for analyzing body fluids," and Class 44, "medical testing services, namely, clinical laboratory analysis of blood samples." The mark published 21 January 2025, nobody opposed, and the notice of allowance issued 18 March 2025 under 15 U.S.C. § 1063(b)(2). The instrument cannot be sold until the FDA clears a 510(k) premarket notification, and the laboratory cannot bill until CLIA certification issues. Kestrel filed its first extension request on 5 September 2025. The model document below is its second — the first one that has to earn its keep with a good-cause showing.

| Period | Runs from | Expires | What Kestrel filed | |---|---|---|---| | Initial six months | 18 Mar 2025 | 18 Sep 2025 | Extension Request 1 (as of right), 5 Sep 2025 | | Extension 1 | 18 Sep 2025 | 18 Mar 2026 | Extension Request 2 (good cause) — the model below | | Extension 2 | 18 Mar 2026 | 18 Sep 2026 | Extension Request 3 | | Extension 3 | 18 Sep 2026 | 18 Mar 2027 | Extension Request 4 | | Extension 4 | 18 Mar 2027 | 18 Sep 2027 | Extension Request 5 — the last one available | | Extension 5 | 18 Sep 2027 | 18 Mar 2028 | Statement of use or the application dies |

Before you start: what you need in hand

Do not draft until every line below is filled in. An extension request is fifteen minutes of work when the intake is complete and a malpractice claim when it is not.

The file.

Serial number, mark as it appears on the drawing, applicant's exact legal name and entity type, state or country of organization, and domicile address.
Filing basis for each class. A multi-basis application can have a § 1(b) class and a § 44(e) class side by side; only the § 1(b) class needs an extension.
The notice of allowance PDF and the issue date printed on its face. Not the date the email arrived. Not the date the client forwarded it.
The identification of goods and services exactly as it appears in the notice of allowance, class by class, after every amendment made during examination. If you are unsure whether an amendment was entered, pull the file from TSDR rather than trusting the docket.
Which extension number this is, and the grant date of each previous one.
The outer limit: thirty-six months from the notice of allowance issue date.

The people.

Who will sign, their title, and which prong of 37 C.F.R. § 2.193(e)(1) they satisfy — legal authority to bind the applicant, firsthand knowledge plus actual or implied authority, or attorney of record.
Whether the applicant is foreign-domiciled and therefore must be represented by a U.S.-licensed attorney, 37 C.F.R. § 2.11.
Whether ownership has changed since filing. This matters more here than anywhere else in prosecution: a § 1(b) application generally cannot be assigned before an amendment to allege use or a statement of use is filed, except to a successor to the applicant's ongoing and existing business to which the mark pertains, 15 U.S.C. § 1060(a)(1). A holding-company reshuffle done for tax reasons in month fourteen can void the application. If anything moved, work the Trademark Assignment Recordal Checklist and read Trademarks in the Deal before you sign anything.

The good cause facts (needed for the second request and every one after).

What the applicant did during the period just ending, with dates, counterparties, and reference numbers: purchase orders, vendor contracts, permit and application numbers, lease dates, prototype milestones, regulatory submissions.
Why use has not started yet, in one honest sentence.
When the applicant expects use to begin, and on what contingency.

The money. $125 per class, per request, under the fee schedule effective 18 January 2025. Two classes is $250. Confirm the current amount before every filing.

The model document

Draft it as the captioned paper below, then transcribe the operative paragraphs into the Trademark Center form fields (or attach the signed PDF where the form permits an attachment). The Office does not need the caption. Your file does — because the captioned version is what you will hand a litigator in 2029 when someone asks what Kestrel was doing in the winter of 2026.

              IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
                   BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER FOR TRADEMARKS

In re Application of:          [APPLICANT LEGAL NAME]
Serial No.:                    [SERIAL NUMBER]
Filing Date:                   [APPLICATION FILING DATE]
Mark:                          [MARK AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWING]
Filing Basis:                  Section 1(b), 15 U.S.C. § 1051(b)
International Class(es):       [NN]; [NN]
Notice of Allowance Issued:    [DATE ON FACE OF THE NOTICE]
Current Period Expires:        [DATE]
Law Office:                    [NNN]
Examining Attorney:            [NAME]
Attorney Docket No.:           [DOCKET NUMBER]

       REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A STATEMENT OF USE
                    (Extension Request No. [N] of 5)

1. Relief requested. Applicant, [APPLICANT LEGAL NAME], a [ENTITY TYPE] organized under the laws of [STATE/COUNTRY] with a domicile address at [ADDRESS], respectfully requests a six-month extension of time in which to file a Statement of Use in the above-identified application, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1051(d)(2) and 37 C.F.R. § 2.89.

2. Timeliness and extension history. The Notice of Allowance in this application issued on [NOA DATE]. The period in which a Statement of Use may be filed currently expires on [CURRENT EXPIRATION DATE]. This Request is filed on [FILING DATE], before that expiration. This is Applicant's [FIRST / SECOND / THIRD / FOURTH / FIFTH] request for an extension of time. The Office previously granted extension requests on [DATE(S), OR: none]. The period requested by this Request would end on [NEW EXPIRATION DATE], which is not more than thirty-six months after the issue date of the Notice of Allowance.

3. Goods and services covered by this Request. Applicant requests this extension with respect to all of the goods and services identified in the Notice of Allowance, namely:

International Class [NN]: [IDENTIFICATION, VERBATIM FROM THE NOTICE OF ALLOWANCE]

International Class [NN]: [IDENTIFICATION, VERBATIM FROM THE NOTICE OF ALLOWANCE]

[OPTIONAL — use only if you are intentionally dropping items:] Applicant does not seek an extension with respect to [GOODS/SERVICES TO BE DELETED], and requests that those goods/services be deleted from the application.

4. Continued bona fide intention to use. Applicant has a continued bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce on or in connection with each of the goods and services identified in Paragraph 3 above.

5. Good cause. [Omit this paragraph entirely for the first extension request.] Good cause exists for this Request. Since the current period began on [DATE], Applicant has engaged in the following ongoing efforts to make use of the mark in commerce on or in connection with the identified goods and services:

(a) On [DATE], Applicant [SPECIFIC STEP — e.g., executed a manufacturing and supply agreement with (VENDOR) for production of the goods bearing the mark].

(b) On [DATE], Applicant [SPECIFIC STEP — e.g., submitted (APPLICATION TYPE) to (AGENCY), assigned reference number (NUMBER), which remains pending].

(c) Between [DATE] and [DATE], Applicant [SPECIFIC STEP — e.g., completed design verification testing on (N) production units and finalized labeling and packaging bearing the mark].

(d) On [DATE], Applicant [SPECIFIC STEP — e.g., entered into a distribution agreement with (DISTRIBUTOR) covering (TERRITORY)].

(e) Applicant has [SPECIFIC STEP — e.g., ordered branded packaging, product literature, and trade show materials bearing the mark from (VENDOR), scheduled for delivery in (MONTH, YEAR)].

Applicant has not yet commenced use of the mark in commerce because [ONE-SENTENCE, TRUTHFUL REASON — e.g., the goods may not lawfully be sold in the United States until (AGENCY) clearance issues]. Applicant expects to commence use of the mark in commerce on or in connection with the identified goods and services in [QUARTER, YEAR], upon [SPECIFIC CONTINGENCY].

6. Fee. The required fee of $125 per class, totaling $[AMOUNT] for [N] class(es), is submitted with this Request. 37 C.F.R. § 2.6.

7. Correspondence. Please direct all correspondence in this application to [ATTORNEY NAME], [FIRM], [ADDRESS], [EMAIL], [PHONE], attorney of record for Applicant.

DECLARATION

The undersigned, being warned that willful false statements and the like are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and that such willful false statements and the like may jeopardize the validity of this submission and of any registration resulting from this application, declares that:

I am [TITLE] of Applicant and am authorized to sign this Request on Applicant's behalf as [a person with legal authority to bind Applicant / a person with firsthand knowledge of the facts and actual or implied authority to act on Applicant's behalf], within the meaning of 37 C.F.R. § 2.193(e)(1);
Applicant has a continued bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce on or in connection with each of the goods and services identified in Paragraph 3 of this Request;
The facts stated in Paragraph 5 of this Request are true of my own knowledge; and
All statements made of my own knowledge are true, and all statements made on information and belief are believed to be true.

Signature:  /[NAME]/
Name:       [PRINTED NAME]
Title:      [TITLE]
Date:       [DATE]

Where each paragraph goes in Trademark Center

| Model paragraph | Form destination | |---|---| | Caption | Serial number field; the rest is for your file | | ¶ 1, ¶ 2 | Selected automatically by the form once you identify the request number; verify the pre-filled period dates against the notice of allowance | | ¶ 3 | Goods/services selection screen — check or uncheck each item; deletions are made here and are permanent | | ¶ 4 | Supplied by the form's verified-statement text; you are adopting it, so read it | | ¶ 5 | "Statement of ongoing efforts" free-text field, or attached as a PDF exhibit where permitted | | ¶ 6 | Fee calculation screen | | ¶ 7 | Correspondence and attorney screens | | Declaration | Signature screen; the form supplies the 18 U.S.C. § 1001 warning |

Clause-by-clause drafting notes

The caption. No rule requires it, and the Office will never see most of it. Draft it anyway. It forces you to write down the notice of allowance date, the current expiration, and the extension number before you touch the form — which is where the three most common errors live. The line "Extension Request No. [N] of 5" is there so that whoever picks up the file next knows how much runway is left without opening TSDR.

¶ 1 — Relief requested. The authority pair is doing real work. 15 U.S.C. § 1051(d)(2) is the statutory grant: the Director shall extend for one additional six-month period on request, and may grant further extensions on a showing of good cause, subject to the thirty-six-month ceiling. 37 C.F.R. § 2.89 is the implementing rule, with § 2.89(a) governing the first request and § 2.89(b) the ones after it. Reciting the applicant's entity type, state of organization, and domicile is not required by the rule; it is there because the owner name on this filing has to match the owner name of record, and writing it out is how you catch a mismatch.

¶ 2 — Timeliness and extension history. Nothing in the rule requires you to plead timeliness. Plead it anyway, for three reasons. First, it makes you do the date arithmetic in a sentence you will read again before signing. Second, if a period is later contested — a request that transmitted at 11:58 p.m. Eastern, a deadline that rolled off a Saturday under 37 C.F.R. § 2.196 — the recital shows what you believed and when. Third, the sentence "which is not more than thirty-six months after the issue date of the Notice of Allowance" is a tripwire. If you cannot write that sentence truthfully, stop drafting: the answer is not an extension request.

¶ 3 — Goods and services covered. The most dangerous paragraph in the document, and the one most often copied from the wrong source. Two rules converge. The extension covers only what it names, and unnamed items are deleted, TMEP § 1108.02(d). And identifications can never be broadened after filing, 37 C.F.R. § 2.71(a) — so a deletion here is irreversible. Paste from the notice of allowance, not the application, not the docketing system, not the last extension request. In a multi-class file, confirm that a § 1(b) class has not quietly been abandoned in a prior period. If the identification is a mess and you are wondering whether to prune it, the analysis is in Drafting an Identification of Goods and Services and the Goods and Services Identification Checklist.

¶ 4 — Continued bona fide intention. This is the sworn core of the filing and the only substantive requirement in a first extension request. 15 U.S.C. § 1051(d)(2); 37 C.F.R. § 2.89(a). "Bona fide" is not a feeling. The Federal Circuit held in M.Z. Berger & Co. v. Swatch AG, 787 F.3d 1368, 1375–76 (Fed. Cir. 2015), that the intent must be firm and demonstrable through objective evidence, and affirmed the Board's finding that an applicant who ordered a few prototypes and did nothing else lacked it. The Board's older rule is sharper still: an absence of documentary evidence of intent can itself establish a prima facie case, Commodore Electronics Ltd. v. CBM Kabushiki Kaisha, 26 U.S.P.Q.2d 1503, 1507 (T.T.A.B. 1993), which the applicant then has to rebut, as the applicant did in Lane Ltd. v. Jackson International Trading Co., 33 U.S.P.Q.2d 1351, 1355 (T.T.A.B. 1994), with contemporaneous business records. Every extension request you file is either a brick in that documentary wall or a hole in it.

Two consequences follow for drafting. Do not swear to intent on goods the client has genuinely dropped — delete them in ¶ 3 instead. And understand that a lack of bona fide intent as to some items does not necessarily void the whole application; the Sixth Circuit in Kelly Services, Inc. v. Creative Harbor, LLC, 846 F.3d 857, 866–68 (6th Cir. 2017), held that the defect invalidates only the goods and services actually lacking intent. That is a reason to prune honestly, not a reason to overclaim.

¶ 5 — Good cause. Required for the second request and each one after, 37 C.F.R. § 2.89(b). The rule tells you what counts: a statement of the applicant's ongoing efforts to make use of the mark in commerce — product or service research or development, market research, manufacturing activities, promotional activities, steps to acquire distributors, steps to obtain required governmental approval, or other similar activities — or, in the alternative, a satisfactory explanation for the failure to make such efforts. 37 C.F.R. § 2.89(d); TMEP § 1108.02(c).

The examining attorney's bar is low. The bar that matters is set by whoever reads these five paragraphs together in discovery three years from now. Compare:

What most firms file. "Applicant is engaged in ongoing efforts to make use of the mark in commerce, including product development and marketing activities."

What Kestrel filed on 2 March 2026. "(a) On 6 October 2025, Applicant executed a manufacturing and supply agreement with Bergland Instrument Works, LLC for production of the Class 10 analyzers bearing the mark. (b) On 14 November 2025, Applicant submitted a 510(k) premarket notification to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (No. K251188) covering the analyzer, which remains under substantive review; FDA issued an Additional Information request on 22 January 2026, to which Applicant responded on 17 February 2026. (c) Between 8 December 2025 and 30 January 2026, Applicant completed design verification testing on twelve production units and finalized labeling and carton artwork bearing the mark. (d) On 21 January 2026, Applicant applied to the Wisconsin Department of Health Services for CLIA certification of its Madison laboratory, required before the Class 44 services may be offered. (e) Applicant has contracted with Northline Print Co. for product literature and trade show materials bearing the mark, scheduled for delivery in May 2026. Applicant has not commenced use because the analyzer may not lawfully be distributed in the United States before FDA clearance issues. Applicant expects to commence use in the third quarter of 2026."

Both paragraphs satisfy the rule. Only one of them survives a cross-examination. The second took fifteen minutes and one email to the client — and it does a fourth job nobody talks about: it forces the client to say out loud whether the project is actually moving, which is the conversation that should be happening in month eighteen anyway.

The regulated-goods wrinkle. Kestrel's delay is lawful — an FDA clearance in progress is the paradigm case of "steps to obtain required governmental approval." Not every regulatory story is that clean. If the goods cannot lawfully be sold in interstate commerce at all, the extension is not your problem: the lawful-use requirement is, and no number of extensions cures it. See The Lawful Use Requirement, the Regulated-Industry Trademark Filing Checklist, and, for the hemp and CBD variants specifically, Registering a Cannabis-Adjacent Trademark.

¶ 6 — Fee. $125 per class per request, and the fee is what makes the request complete. A request transmitted without payment is not a filing. In a two-class application where use has begun in one class, do not pay for both out of habit — see the divide-and-file alternative below.

¶ 7 — Correspondence. Boilerplate with a purpose. Correspondence in trademark matters is email-only under 37 C.F.R. § 2.23, and the notice granting or denying this request goes to the address of record. Every year, applications go abandoned because the address of record was a departed paralegal's mailbox. Update it here if it is stale.

The declaration. 37 C.F.R. § 2.20 allows a declaration in lieu of an oath; 37 C.F.R. § 2.193(e)(1) fixes who may sign. Three categories: a person with legal authority to bind the applicant, a person with firsthand knowledge of the facts and actual or implied authority to act, or a qualified attorney. In practice that means an officer, a member-manager, or counsel of record — not the founder's assistant, not a marketing director with no authority, and not "the company."

Numbered paragraph 3 of the declaration — swearing that the good-cause facts are true of the signer's own knowledge — is not in any USPTO form and is deliberate. It puts the person who actually knows what happened on the hook for the facts, which is exactly the discipline that keeps a good-cause paragraph honest. If your signatory will not swear to ¶ 5, ¶ 5 is wrong.

On fraud. A false statement here is unlikely to be fraud, because fraud on the USPTO requires proof, by clear and convincing evidence, of a knowingly false material representation made with intent to deceive. In re Bose Corp., 580 F.3d 1240, 1245 (Fed. Cir. 2009). But "unlikely to be fraud" is a terrible drafting standard, and the pleading gets made anyway. The realistic exposure is a bona fide intent challenge, which requires no scienter at all. Work the Trademark Fraud Claim and Self-Audit Checklist before you sign a fifth extension on goods nobody has touched, and read Pleading and Proving Trademark Fraud and Fraud on the Trademark Office for what the claim actually requires.

Alternative and optional clauses

A. The first request — strip it down. Delete ¶ 5 entirely. The first extension is granted as of right on the verified statement of continued bona fide intent and the fee. 15 U.S.C. § 1051(d)(2); 37 C.F.R. § 2.89(a). Do not volunteer a good-cause showing you do not owe; you are creating a document with no upside. Keep ¶ 2, though — the date recital is worth more than the paragraph you deleted.

B. The fifth request — say so out loud. Add to ¶ 2:

This is Applicant's fifth and final available request for an extension of time. The period requested expires [DATE], which is thirty-six months after the issue date of the Notice of Allowance. Applicant understands that no further extension is available under 15 U.S.C. § 1051(d)(2).

That sentence is for the client file, not the examiner. Send it to the client with the invoice and a calendar invitation.

C. The insurance extension — filed with or after a statement of use. You may file an extension request during the same six-month period in which you file a statement of use. TMEP § 1108.03. If the statement of use is examined after that period closes and comes back refused — an unacceptable specimen, a date-of-use problem, a signature defect — the pending extension gives you six more months to fix it rather than watching the application go abandoned mid-argument. Replace ¶ 1 with:

Applicant has concurrently filed a Statement of Use in this application. Solely as a precaution, and without conceding any deficiency in that Statement of Use, Applicant requests a six-month extension of time in which to file a Statement of Use, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1051(d)(2) and 37 C.F.R. § 2.89, in the event the Statement of Use is found not to satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 2.88.

$125 per class is cheap relative to the alternative. File it whenever the specimen is anything other than a photograph of a labeled product, whenever you are filing in the last two weeks of a period, and whenever the goods are services — the refusal rate on service specimens is the reason Specimen Refusals exists.

D. Partial deletion. Use the optional sentence in ¶ 3, and be certain. Deletion is immediate and permanent, 37 C.F.R. § 2.71(a). Deleting is right when the client has genuinely killed a product line; it narrows the intent you are swearing to and shrinks the target in any future opposition. It is wrong when the client is merely late.

E. Divide instead of extending everything. Where use has begun in one class and not another, the better filing package is a statement of use for the ready class, a request to divide under 37 C.F.R. § 2.87, and an extension request for the parent. The child registers now; the parent keeps the original filing date, the constructive-use priority of 15 U.S.C. § 1057(c), and the same thirty-six-month clock. Add to ¶ 3:

This Request pertains to the goods and services remaining in the parent application following the concurrently filed Request to Divide, namely: [ITEMS].

F. Changed ownership. If the applicant of record is no longer the right entity, do not simply write the new name into the caption. An amendment cannot substitute a different entity as applicant, 37 C.F.R. § 2.71(d), and a § 1(b) application generally cannot be assigned before an allegation of use except to a successor to the applicant's ongoing and existing business, 15 U.S.C. § 1060(a)(1). Record the assignment, then add:

The application was assigned to Applicant by [ASSIGNOR] by assignment dated [DATE], recorded with the USPTO Assignment Recordation Branch at Reel [NNNN], Frame [NNNN], as an assignment to the successor to the ongoing and existing business of [ASSIGNOR] to which the mark pertains.

The paperwork is in the Trademark Assignment Agreement — Template.

G. The "no efforts" alternative. The rule permits a satisfactory explanation for the failure to make efforts, in place of a list of efforts. 37 C.F.R. § 2.89(d). Use it rarely and honestly:

Applicant did not undertake efforts toward use of the mark during the period just ended because [REASON — e.g., Applicant's manufacturing facility was destroyed by fire on (DATE) and rebuilding was not completed until (DATE)]. Applicant's intention to use the mark in commerce on the identified goods has not changed, and Applicant will [SPECIFIC STEPS] during the requested period.

Two of these in a row is a signal, to you and to a future adversary, that the file should be abandoned or the identification cut to what the client will really launch.

H. Non-traditional marks. If the allowed mark is a color, sound, scent, motion, or product configuration, the extension paperwork is ordinary but the statement of use will not be. Start building the specimen and description record now — see the Non-Traditional Trademark Application Checklist and Registering a Non-Traditional Mark. The same is true for certification and collective marks, where "use" means use by authorized users under the applicant's control: see Applying for a Certification or Collective Mark and the Certification and Collective Mark Application Checklist.

Filing mechanics

Where it goes. Trademark Center, electronically. Electronic filing and an email correspondence address are mandatory under 37 C.F.R. § 2.23. Paper filing requires a petition to the Director under 37 C.F.R. § 2.146 showing that electronic submission is not possible, plus a fee — a route that exists and that you will almost certainly never take.

Fees. $125 per class, per request, effective 18 January 2025. Kestrel's two-class request cost $250. Payment by credit card, EFT, or deposit account; a deposit account is worth setting up before your first month-thirty-five filing, because a declined card at 11:50 p.m. is an abandoned application.

Timing. The request must be received in the Office before the current period expires. Electronic submissions are dated by receipt in the Office in Eastern Time, 37 C.F.R. § 2.195 — a fact that matters to every practitioner west of Ohio. If the deadline falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or federal holiday within the District of Columbia, it rolls to the next business day, 37 C.F.R. § 2.196. Know that rule; never plan around it.

Proof of transmission. Save three things the moment the filing completes: the success screen with the filing date and reference number, the confirmation email, and the PDF the Office generates. Then check TSDR the next business day to confirm the document posted to the Documents tab and that the "goods and services" reflected are the ones you intended. Two minutes now, versus reconstructing a filing you cannot prove.

What comes back. The Office issues a notice granting or denying the request, usually within a few weeks. A denial is nearly always mechanical — filed late, unsigned, unpaid, signed by the wrong person, or filed after the maximum. If the current period is still open, fix and refile immediately. If it has closed, the route is a petition to revive for unintentional delay under 15 U.S.C. § 1051(d)(4) and 37 C.F.R. § 2.66, filed within two months of the issue date of the notice of abandonment and accompanied by the missing filing itself. A petition that promises to file the extension request later is not a petition. Substantive denials — a good-cause showing the Office finds inadequate — are rare and go to the Director under 37 C.F.R. § 2.146.

What to calendar the day it transmits.

| Date | Why | |---|---| | New period expiration | The next statement of use or extension deadline | | New period expiration minus 60 days | Client status call: use started? specimen captured? still the right identification? | | Thirty-six months from the notice of allowance, in red | The only genuinely unrecoverable date in this process | | Ninety days out | Specimen capture reminder if launch is scheduled inside the period |

Put the outer limit on a different reminder track than everything else, with a twelve-, six-, three-, and one-month cadence. The habit is described in Docketing Deadlines; at portfolio scale it belongs in the Trademark Portfolio Management Toolkit and gets audited annually under the Annual Trademark Portfolio Review Checklist.

Common mistakes

Counting from the wrong date. Every deadline runs from the issue date printed on the notice of allowance, not from receipt, not from the day the client forwarded it. 15 U.S.C. § 1051(d)(1).

Pasting the identification from the application. The notice of allowance reflects every amendment made during examination. Copy from it. Anything you omit is deleted. TMEP § 1108.02(d).

Filing an extension when you should be filing a statement of use. If the mark is in use, extending burns a period you may need later and delays a registration the client is paying to own.

Filing a statement of use when you should be extending. Use must have commenced on or before the day the statement of use is filed. A statement of use filed in anticipation of a launch next week is defective, and if the period has expired there is nothing left to cure with. When in doubt, extend.

Reusing the same good-cause paragraph. Five identical sentences across three years is the exhibit, not the defense. Commodore Electronics, 26 U.S.P.Q.2d at 1507.

Letting the wrong person sign. 37 C.F.R. § 2.193(e)(1) is short and specific. A signature by someone outside its three categories is a defect, and it is a defect in a sworn document.

Missing one class in a multi-class file. The fee is per class and so is the coverage. A request that pays for and names Class 10 does nothing for Class 44.

Assuming the thirty-six-month cap is negotiable. It is not. It is in the statute. No petition, no diligence showing, no supply-chain failure, and no revival reaches month thirty-seven. If you are at month thirty and the product does not exist, the honest advice is to plan a refiling and re-clear the mark, because three years of intervening applications may have overtaken your priority. Whether common-law use bridges the gap is analyzed in Establishing and Proving Common-Law Trademark Rights.

Ignoring an ownership change. The § 1(b) assignment restriction in 15 U.S.C. § 1060(a)(1) is the sharpest edge in this whole process, and the extension request — signed by an officer of an entity that may not be the applicant of record — is where it usually surfaces.

Swearing to intent on dead goods. Every extension that carries a product line the client killed in year one is a sworn statement waiting to be read back. Delete it in ¶ 3 and move on.