What Are the 2023 USPTO Trademark Filing Fees? featured image

What Are the 2023 USPTO Trademark Filing Fees?

by John DiGiacomo

Partner

Trademark

In brief, current trademark filing fees (2023) are:

  • $250 or $350 for a standard currently-being-used application for registration
  • An additional $250 or $350 per Class if the trademark is to be associated with more than one Class of goods or services
  • $100 per Class if the application is an intent-to-use application

Additional details are provided below.

Applications for registration of a trademark are filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO“). As with any government agency, there are many fees that are charged for various filings. As of 2023, the basic filing fee for a trademark registration application is $250 or $350, depending on whether you are using the standard e-filing process or the e-filing Plus system.

Note that the basic charge of $250-350 for a trademark registration application is for a trademark that is associated with ONE trademark and ONE Class of goods and services. An example would be a trademark to be used on paper goods (like books), which is Class 16. For applications where the trademark is expected to be associated with more than one Class, then there is an additional charge of $250-350 per Class over and above the first. So, if the proposed trademark was to be used for printed materials (Class 16) and on t-shirts/clothing (Class 25), then the application fees would be $500 or $700, depending on the current e-filing system being used. Likewise, if you are seeking to register more than one trademark, such as a word trademark and a logo/design, then the application fees are charged for each proposed registration. Only one trademark can be listed on an application for registration.

As noted, using the e-filing PLUS system results in the lower charge being assessed. However, in May 2023, the USPTO proposed eliminating the distinction between the standard and PLUS e-filing systems. If approved, the changes will go into effect in 2024, and all applications for trademark registration will be $350. Note further that since 2020, the USPTO no longer accepts paper applications.

If you are filing an “intent-to-use” application, there is an additional $100 fee that will be charged. As with the other fees, this charge is for EACH Class of goods selected. The most common type of application is an “actual use” or “currently-being-used” application. This simply means that the trademark has been used in commerce prior to the trademark application being filed. However, as the name suggested, an intent-to-use application is one where the applicant will BEGIN to use the trademark in the FUTURE. Technically, there is no extra charge for the application. However, later in the process, the applicant must file a Statement of Use, which must be accompanied by a $100 fee for each Class of goods and services with which the intent-to-use trademark is associated. An intent-to-use application cannot be completed — that is, the trademark cannot be registered — without the filing of a Statement of Use.

Contact the Trademark Attorneys at Revision Legal For more information, contact the experienced Trademark Lawyers at Revision Legal. You can contact us through the form on this page or call (855) 473-8474.

Extra, Extra!
Recent Posts

Can I Trademark a Non-English Word or Phrase in the U.S.?

Can I Trademark a Non-English Word or Phrase in the U.S.?

Trademark

Yes, as long as the proposed trademark meets the other requirements for registration. U.S. trademark laws do not require that only the English language can be used for trademarks. However, whatever the language, trademarks must meet the legal requirements, including functionality, distinctiveness, uniqueness, etc. For example, every trademark must function as a trademark in that […]

Read more about Can I Trademark a Non-English Word or Phrase in the U.S.?

California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code Act Declared Wholly Unconstitutional

California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code Act Declared Wholly Unconstitutional

Internet Law

In a new ruling, a California federal judge has declared the entirety of California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (“CAADCA”) to be unconstitutional. Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1798.99.28 et seq. See media report here and the Opinion here. The case is Netchoice, LLC. v. Bonta, Case No. 22-cv-08861-BLF (US N.Dist. Cal, March 13, 2025). The CAADCA […]

Read more about California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code Act Declared Wholly Unconstitutional

Put Revision Legal on your side