Panelists and audience members explored the implications of the growing length of identifications of goods and services in U.S. trademark registrations and how accurately such identifications reflect actual use or intent-to-use, following the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in In re Bose Corp., 580  F.3d 1240, 91 USPQ2d 1938 (Fed. Cir. 2009).   A "brainstorming" session at the conclusion of the roundtable resulted in a list of suggestions for how to improve the accuracy of identified of goods and services, both during examination prior to registration and also post registration.
The suggestions from the brainstorming session are presented here, followed by the USPTO’s general assessment of each suggestion’s potential effectiveness to increase the accuracy of identifications and USPTO comments on the suggestion.  The effectiveness assessment ratings are “highly effective,” “moderately effective,” “minimally effective,” and “counter-effective” (where the USPTO believes the suggestion would bring about unintended adverse consequences).  The USPTO’s effectiveness assessment factors in the scope of the suggestion, and therefore gives a lower assessment to an otherwise effective suggestion that is limited, for example, only to use-based filers without reaching filers under Sections 44 or 66(a).  Similarly, a suggestion that addresses attorney behavior but does not reach non-attorney behavior may receive a lower assessment, given the limited scope of the suggestion.

For more details check out www.uspto.gov