The third amendment to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Rules took effect on June 1, 2014. The principal changes are as follows.
1. The case categories were revised. Opposition review became review of refusal to register; disputes became invalidation cases. Review of invalidation decisions and review of cancellation decisions were distinguished.
2. To protect an opponent's procedural interests, where a mark is registered following review of refusal to register and the original opponent subsequently requests invalidation, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board must appoint a new panel to hear the case.
3. Where the parties settle, the Board may close the case or issue a decision or ruling.
4. In cases with an opposing party, evidence that has not been exchanged and subject to that party's response should not be accepted.
5. During first-instance administrative litigation, a cited mark may lose its prior rights, changing the facts or law underlying the Board's decision. If the plaintiff withdraws the action, the Board may withdraw its original decision and issue a new one based on the changed facts.
6. Transitional rules distinguish different cases. Refusal reviews requested before May 1, 2014 but heard afterwards are governed by the amended Trademark Law. For opposition reviews in that period, standing to file the opposition and review is governed by the former law, while other procedural and substantive issues follow the amended law. For disputes and cancellation reviews concerning registered marks requested before May 1 but heard afterwards, procedural issues follow the new law and substantive issues the former law. The time limit for hearing previously requested review cases runs from May 1, 2014.