Submitting Proof of Use: Responding to DOI Administrative Notices
What to do when the Department of Industry questions a registration's use — the notice, the response window, the evidence bundle, and the drafting that turns an inquiry into a confirmation.
The letter from the Department is rarely a surprise to the mark that has been used — but it is existential for the one that has not. Administrative notices about use are how Section 18C's one-year rule gets teeth, and how registrations that exist only on paper get pruned.
This guide covers the response: the clock, the evidence, the drafting — and the honest decisions when use cannot be shown.
In short
When the Department of Industry questions whether a registered trademark is in use, the response is an evidence exercise inside a stated window: dated specimens of the mark as registered, invoices, advertising and distribution records from Nepal, plus corporate or licence documents connecting the user to the registration. Organise the bundle by the registration's own particulars, respond within the deadline, and where use genuinely cannot be shown, take a decision — voluntary surrender or a use plan — rather than silence.
Reading the notice before drafting anything
Administrative notices vary, but they share a structure: the registration concerned (number, class), the ground — typically non-use under Section 18C or a particulars query — and a deadline. Before anything else, verify the registration details match your certificate and diarise the deadline in both calendars; the response clock is the one procedural fact that cannot be negotiated afterwards.
Identify what is actually being asked. A use inquiry wants evidence of genuine commercial use; a particulars query wants documents; a third-party complaint routed through the Department wants a position. Answering the wrong question well is still a failed response.
- Verify registration number, class and mark against your certificate
- Diarise the response deadline (BS + AD) immediately
- Identify the ground: use inquiry vs. particulars query vs. third-party complaint
The evidence bundle, assembled properly
Use evidence persuades when it is dated, Nepal-specific, in the registered form, and connected to the proprietor. The bundle is assembled in that order:
Specimens of the mark as registered
Packaging, labels, signage, screenshots of Nepali sales channels — showing the mark as registered, for the registered goods. Material showing a different form needs an explanation of equivalence.
Commercial documents with dates
Invoices, bills of lading, retail listings — dated across the relevant period, naming the mark and the goods. Volume matters less than genuineness and continuity.
Advertising and promotion
Dated Nepali advertisements, campaign records, event sponsorships — evidence that the mark is out among consumers, not in a warehouse.
The connecting documents
Corporate papers tying the user to the registration — or the recorded licence if a licensee used the mark. This is where unrecorded licence arrangements become expensive; record them before the notice, not during it.
Legal references
- Patent, Design and Trade Mark Act, 2022 (1965) — English translation (PDF) — WIPO Lex
- Department of Industry — Industrial Property Section — Government of Nepal
The response: short, organized, on time
The response letter is a cover, not an essay: identify the registration, state that the mark has been in genuine use since [date], list the enclosed exhibits with dates, and address any specific point the notice raised. Organise exhibits chronologically with a one-page index — the reviewing officer reads files, not arguments.
Respond within the window, through the agent of record where one exists. A strong bundle submitted late fails; a modest bundle submitted early with an offer to supplement usually succeeds.
- Cover letter: registration, position, exhibit list — one page
- Exhibits: chronological, indexed, dated, Nepal-relevant
- On time, via the agent of record, with an offer to supplement
When use cannot be shown
If the honest answer is that the mark has not been used, the response is a decision, not a document. The options: begin genuine use immediately and show it developing (viable where the registration still matters); voluntary surrender and redeploy the budget; or, where the mark is defensively important, propose a concrete use or licensing plan — recorded, not hypothetical.
What does not work is silence or bluff. An ignored inquiry ends the registration on the Department's schedule; an evidence bundle that will not survive comparison with reality damages credibility for every future filing from the same proprietor.
Prevention: the habit that makes notices boring
Every strong response begins as a use file maintained from month one — quarterly specimens, invoices and ads, per mark. Registrations with living files answer administrative notices in an afternoon; registrations without them learn about Section 18C the hard way. The notice is not the problem; the silence before it was.
Legal references
Want this handled for your brand?
IP Watch monitors new trademark publications in Nepal and alerts you to potentially conflicting marks — with the context needed to review them.
This article is general information, not legal advice.