Trademarks Opposition Board Moves to Digital-Only Submission of Confidential Information
As of June 1, 2026, the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) requires all confidential evidence and documentation in proceedings under sections 11.13, 38, or 45 of the Trademarks Act (the “Act”) to be submitted and served through “Connect”, Canada Post’s secure digital file-sharing platform.
These changes are reflected in the amended practice notice on confidentiality orders, which form part of the TMOB’s broader effort to modernize its operations and improve service. The amended practice notice also clarifies the test for obtaining a confidentiality order and how the Registrar assesses the applicable criteria, as set out in the Sierra Club and Sherman Estate decisions discussed below.
Background
Documents filed with the Registrar are generally publicly available under section 29(1) of the Act. However, parties may request that evidence be kept confidential. The request itself, and any submissions, will remain public even if the order is granted.
Requests for Confidentiality Order
Timing: Requests must be made before submitting the evidence. Importantly, filing a request does not extend evidence deadlines; parties must separately request an extension under section 47 of the Act. The Registrar will generally grant a one-month extension from the date of the confidentiality order for the party to submit and serve their evidence.
Content: Requests may be filed through the TMOB’s online services or by mail/delivery to the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) and must include:
- a description of the evidence a party wishes to be kept confidential;
- a statement that the evidence has not been made public;
- the reasons why the evidence should be kept confidential;
- an indication of whether the other party consents to the request;
- any other information the Registrar requires to make a decision; and
- at least one valid email address for use with the Connect service.
The Test
In deciding whether to grant a confidentiality order under section 95.1(2) of the Regulations, the Registrar considers the public interest in open and accessible proceedings. The applicable test was set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in Sierra Club of Canada v. Canada (Minister of Finance), 2002 SCC 41 and restated in Sherman Estate v. Donovan, 2021 SCC 25. Namely, the requesting party must establish the following:
- Court openness poses a serious risk to an important public interest: the risk must be real and substantial. The interest at stake must be a public interest in confidentiality, not one merely specific to the requesting party. For example, a party breaking its contractual obligations to protect the confidential information of a third party, or the public interest in fair competition.
- The order sought is necessary to prevent the risk because reasonably alternative measures will not prevent the risk: The Registrar will consider whether alternatives, such as redacting confidential information, would suffice. Any order issued will be restricted in scope as much as is reasonably possible.
- The benefits of the order outweigh its negative effects: The Registrar will assess whether the confidential information is peripheral or central to the judicial process, and whether redaction of the proposed confidential information in a potential decision on the merits would still allow for the decision to be understood. The requesting party should thus advise as to the proportion of evidence which is sought to be kept confidential.
The Registrar also noted that, while opposing party consent may “inform” the assessment, a confidentiality order remains “extraordinary,” and the onus lies on the party seeking to depart from the open court principle.
Submitting and Serving Confidential Information
If a confidentiality order is granted, it will outline the manner of submitting and serving evidence or subsequent documentation that has been designated as confidential. Unless the order sets out alternative methods, confidential information must now be submitted and served through the Connect service, as detailed below. As of June 1, 2026, confidential information submitted through the TMOB’s online services or in paper form will be automatically published to the Trademarks Document Retrieval Service and made publicly available without prior notice.
Email Notification: The Registrar will initiate a secure conversation in Connect by sending an email notification to the parties (from the CIPO’s email address: cipotmobrec-opiccomcrec@ised-isde.gc.ca) inviting them to participate. To access the conversation, parties must click “Access the Message” in the notification email and sign in to (or create) a Canada Post online account.
Submission: Confidential evidence and any subsequent documentation must be submitted to the Registrar in two versions: (i) a public version, in which the confidential information has been redacted or removed; and (ii) a confidential version in which the confidential portions have been highlighted in yellow or appear on a yellow background. The public version can be submitted through TMOB’s online services or by paper, either by regular mail or by physical delivery at the CIPO. The confidential version must be submitted through the Connect service.
Service: Service of the public version of evidence or subsequent documentation may be effected by any manner permitted under the Regulations or agreed to by the parties. Confidential versions, however, will be effected automatically by submitting them through the Connect service.
Takeaways
Parties seeking to protect confidential information in TMOB proceedings should be mindful of the June 1, 2026 deadline, after which all confidential evidence must be submitted and served exclusively through Canada Post’s Connect service.
Failure to comply with these new digital submission requirements may result in confidential information being automatically published to the Trademarks Document Retrieval Service without prior notice.
This update is for information purposes only. It is not to be relied on as legal advice. Should you require legal advice, we would be pleased to discuss the matters raised in this update in the context of your particular circumstances.
Authors
Insights
-
Intellectual Property Litigation
Trademarks Opposition Board Moves to Digital-Only Submission of Confidential Information
As of June 1, 2026, the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) requires all confidential evidence and documentation in proceedings under sections 11.13, 38, or 45 of the Trademarks Act (the “Act”) to be… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Pecking Order Problem: Pudgy Penguins Faces Penguin Trademark Lawsuit
As reported by Bloomberg Law News, PEI Licensing (“PEI”), the owner of the Penguin apparel brand, has sued Pudgy Penguins NFT (“Pudgy Penguins”) for trademark infringement.Pudgy Penguins started as a… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Old Brand, New Problems? Nike’s Attempt to Revive “Total 90” Soccer Cleats
Nike is reportedly attempting to revive its classic “Total 90” soccer cleat line, but has encountered an unexpected setback. Total90, LLC has reportedly asserted that Nike is infringing its… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Swing and a Miss: The “All Rise” Trademark Attempt
As reported by Bloomberg, attempts to register marks covering the phrases “All Rise” and “Here Comes the Judge” were rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Hershey’s Kisses Go to Court – Federal Court of Appeal Decision in PIM Brands Inc. v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC
The Federal Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Promotion in Motion, Inc. (PIM Brands, Inc.) v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC offers fresh guidance on how courts evaluate survey evidence… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
CIPO Explores Fast-Tracking Patents for Innovation in Priority Sectors
Industry Minister Mélanie Joly is reportedly evaluating a proposal from the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (“CIPO”) that would accelerate patent applications in artificial intelligence…
Featured Work
-
Mergers and Acquisitions
HoudiniSwap acquired by Sol Strategies for US$18 million
Goodman LLP advised HoudiniSwap LLC in connection with its acquisition by Sol Strategies for US$18 million… -
Mining
Coeur Mining, Inc. acquires New Gold Inc. for US$7 billion
Goodmans LLP acted for Coeur Mining, Inc. in connection with its acquisition of New Gold Inc. for US$7 billion… -
Private Equity
Dayforce taken private by Thoma Bravo for US$12.3 billion
Goodmans LLP advised Dayforce, Inc. as Canadian counsel in connection with its acquisition by Thoma Bravo in an all-cash transaction with an enterprise value of US$12.3 billion… -
REITS and Income Securities
Minto Apartment REIT announces going-private transaction with Crestpoint and Minto Group
Goodmans LLP is acting for Minto Apartment Real Estate Investment Trust (the “REIT”) in connection with its going-private transaction with Crestpoint Real Estate Investments Limited Partnership… -
Mergers and Acquisitions
Maple acquires Beyond ADHD
Goodmans LLP acted for Maple Corporation in connection with its acquisition of Beyond ADHD, whereby Beyond ADHD will operate as a Maple subsidiary… -
Mergers and Acquisitions
RF Capital Group acquired by iA Financial Corporation in C$597 million all-cash transaction
Goodmans LLP advised RF Capital Group in connection with its acquisition by iA Financial Corporation, a Quebec City-based insurance and wealth management company, in an all-cash transaction valued at…
News & Events
-
Intellectual Property Litigation
IAM Patent 1000 Honours Goodmans With Gold Tier Recognition
We are pleased to share the 2026 edition of IAM Patent 1000 has honoured Goodmans with Gold tier recognition for the fourth consecutive year.Congratulations to our Intellectual Property Litigation… -
Litigation and Dispute Resolution
Goodmans Recognized in the 2026 Edition of Benchmark Litigation Canada
We are delighted to announce Goodmans is recognized as a Highly Recommended firm in the 2026 edition of Benchmark Litigation Canada.16 Goodmans Partners have been recognized as the country’s most… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Goodmans Intellectual Property Litigation Group Received Top Honours at the Managing IP Awards Americas 2026
We are proud to share Goodmans Intellectual Property Litigation Team has won multiple awards at the Managing IP Awards Americas 2026.Firm of the Year (Canada): Patent DisputesGoodmans has been…