There is a disconformity between some pre-assessment letter details presented via CIPO’s online trademark database and those presented in CIPO’s trademark .xml data. Hundreds of applications appear to be affected.For example, the online database entry for application no. 1986764 includes Action History items for two pre-assessment letters respectively dated 13 April 2022 and 18 May 2022, as highlighted here (click any image in this post to enlarge the image):
The segments labelled ① and ③ respectively correspond to the 13 April 2022 and 18 May 2022 pre-assessment letters. However, the online database Action History has no entry corresponding to segment ②, which pertains to a 9 May 2022 pre-assessment letter. This is apparently because the 18 May 2022 letter purports to replace the 9 May 2022 letter. An extract from one of CIPO’s replacement pre-assessment letters appears in the next image:
There is nothing in CIPO’s .xml data to suggest that the 18 May 2022 pre-assessment letter corrects, replaces or otherwise affects the 9 May 2022 letter. XML segments ①, ② and ③ each contain identical <tmk:MarkEventCode>287</tmk:MarkEventCode> elements. “287” is the numerical code that CIPO has assigned to the “Pre-Assessment Letter Sent” event.
There are also cases in which pre-assessment letters dated 9 May 2022 have been excluded from the online database, apparently without a “replacement” or other relevant communication from CIPO. Examples include application nos. 1978096 and 1978101. The online database shows only a 12-Apr-2022 pre-assessment letter for each of these applications. The corresponding .xml files indicate that both applications also received 9-May-2022 pre-assessment letters, but do not indicate that either application received any other pre-assessment letters (see below from the .xml file for the ‘096 application).
A possible inference is that an internal glitch affected a number of CIPO’s 9 May 2022 pre-assessment letters. The disconformity between the results observed via the online database vs. the .xml data may be due to the involvement of different CIPO teams with the database on the one hand and the .xml data on the other.
There does not appear to be a reliable way to process the .xml data to identify replacement situations as mentioned above. One possible solution would be for CIPO to allocate a new <tmk:MarkEventCode> value to identify replacement pre-assessment letters. However, to be effective, such allocation would require CIPO to retroactively correct and reissue the .xml files of every application for which a replacement pre-assessment letter was sent.
How widespread is the problem? It is impossible to say without a reliable way to detect replacement situations. Inspection of the .xml data indicates that:
- 2,390 applications received pre-assessment letters dated 9 May 2022;
- 2,381 applications received pre-assessment letters dated 18 May 2022;
- 383 applications received both a pre-assessment letter dated 9 May 2022 and a pre-assessment letter dated 18 May 2022; and
- 2,007 applications received a pre-assessment letter dated 9 May 2022 but did not receive a pre-assessment letter dated 18 May 2022.
The apparent consequence is that CIPO’s trademark .xml data cannot be relied upon for accurate analysis of pre-assessment letters in all situations, e.g. situations including the 383 applications which received both 9 May 2022 and 18 May 2022 pre-assessment letters. A count of pre-assessment results including those 383 applications will be inaccurate due to double counting of pre-assessment letters that have been replaced.
