UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
|
SERIAL NO: 76/195685
APPLICANT: ADVERTISING DUSE S.R.L.
|
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: JOSEPH J ORLANDO BUCKNAM AND ARCHER 1077 NORTHERN BLVD ROSLYN NY 11576-1696
|
RETURN ADDRESS: Commissioner for Trademarks 2900 Crystal Drive Arlington, VA 22202-3514 ecom113@uspto.gov
|
|
MARK: ALCATRAZ
|
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: FF-1596
CORRESPONDENT EMAIL ADDRESS:
|
Please provide in all correspondence:
1. Filing date, serial number, mark and applicant's name. 2. Date of this Office Action. 3. Examining Attorney's name and Law Office number. 4. Your telephone number and e-mail address.
|
Serial Number 76/195685
The assigned examining attorney has reviewed the statement of use filed on June 4, 2003 and has determined the following.
The Examining Attorney refuses registration because the proposed mark does not function as a trademark. Trademark Act Sections 1, 2 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1052 and 1127. The proposed mark neither identifies and distinguishes the goods of the applicant from those of others nor indicates their source. In Re Remington Products Inc., 3 USPQ2d 1714 (TTAB 1987). TMEP §§1202 et seq. Please note that the proposed mark does not function as a trademark because the specimen submitted with the statement of use is unacceptable as evidence of actual trademark use; therefore, the proposed mark cannot identify and distinguish the applicant's goods from those of others nor indicate their source.
The specimen is unacceptable as evidence of actual trademark use because it is an advertisement in a trade publication. Invoices, announcements, order forms, bills of lading, leaflets, brochures, publicity releases and other advertising material generally are not acceptable specimens. In re Bright of America, Inc., 205 USPQ 63 (TTAB 1979); TMEP §§904.05 and 904.07. See In re Ultraflight Inc., 221 USPQ 903 (TTAB 1984).
The applicant must submit a specimen showing the mark as it is used in commerce. 37 C.F.R. §§2.56 and 2.88(b)(2). Examples of acceptable specimens are tags, labels, instruction manuals, containers, and photographs that show the mark on the goods or packaging. TMEP §§904.04 et seq. The applicant must verify, with an affidavit or a declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20, that the substitute specimen was in use in commerce prior to the expiration of the time allowed to the applicant for filing a statement of use. 37 C.F.R. §2.59(b); TMEP §§904.09 and 1109.09(b).
The statement supporting use of the substitute specimen must read as follows:
The substitute specimen was in use in commerce prior to the expiration of the time allowed to the applicant for filing a statement of use.
The applicant must sign this statement either in affidavit form or with a declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20; TMEP §§904.09 and 1109.09(b).
If an amendment of the dates-of-use clause is necessary in order to state the correct dates of first use, the applicant must verify the amendment with an affidavit or a declaration in accordance with 37 C.F.R. §2.20. 37 C.F.R. §2.71(c); TMEP §§903.05 and 1109.09(a).
Pending an adequate response to the above, the examining attorney refuses registration under Trademark Act Sections 1, 2 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1052 and 1127, because the record does not show use of the proposed mark as a trademark.
Although the examining attorney has refused registration, the applicant may respond to the refusal to register by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.
If the applicant chooses to respond to the refusal to register, the applicant must also respond to the following informality.
The drawing displays the mark as ALCATRAZ in a black rectangular carrier. However, this differs from the display of the mark on the specimen, where it appears as “alcatraz” in stylized lower case letters. The applicant must either:
(1) submit a new drawing of the mark that agrees with the specimen; or
(2) submit a substitute specimen that shows use of the mark shown in the drawing.
The applicant may not amend the drawing if the amendment would materially alter the character of the mark. 37 C.F.R. §2.72(b); TMEP §§807.14, 807.14(a) and 807.14(a)(i). In the present case, the applicant would be permitted to amend the drawing.
If a substitute specimen is submitted, the applicant must verify, with an affidavit or a declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20, that the substitute specimen was in use in commerce prior to the expiration of the time allowed to the applicant for filing a statement of use. 37 C.F.R. §§2.59(b) and 2.72(b); TMEP §904.09.
If the applicant has any questions or needs assistance in responding to this Office action, please telephone the assigned examining attorney.
/Julie A. Watson/
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 113
(703) 308-9113 ex. 210
(703) 746-8113 - fax
How to respond to this Office Action:
To respond formally using the Office’s Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), visit http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/index.html and follow the instructions.
To respond formally via E-mail, visit http://www.gov.uspto.report/web/trademarks/tmelecresp.htm and follow the instructions.
To respond formally via regular mail, your response should be sent to the mailing Return Address listed above and include the serial number, law office and examining attorney’s name on the upper right corner of each page of your response.