You’ve negotiated a consent agreement and both sides signed, so the USPTO has to accept it, right? Trademark attorney Jessica Eaves Mathews explains why that assumption is wrong, and why agreeing to consent too quickly can cost you leverage you need later.

In this video, Jessica walks through how consent and coexistence agreements show up specifically inside USPTO proceedings, from section 2D likelihood of confusion refusals to oppositions and cancellation proceedings at the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. She explains why a bare consent, a simple agreement to coexist without real operational boundaries, is rarely enough to satisfy an examiner, and why senior trademark owners in particular should think twice before consenting even when it would resolve the immediate dispute. She also covers a decision framework and specific red flags for evaluating whether a proposed consent agreement actually protects your brand or just gets you past a deadline.

What’s covered:

• Why mutual consent doesn’t bind the USPTO or the TTAB
• What a bare consent is and why examiners reject it
• Why senior mark owners should be cautious about consenting
• A decision framework for evaluating consent proposals
• Red flags specific to USPTO and TTAB disputes

If you’re facing a 2D refusal, opposition, or cancellation and considering consent, schedule a consultation: https://www.leveragelegalgroup.com/contact/