UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
SERIAL NO: 76/333392
APPLICANT: Chandler Engineering Company, L.L.C.
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: ANTHONY P. VENTURINO STEVENS, DAVIS, MILLER & MOSHER 1615 L STREET NW, SUITE 850 WASHINGTON, DC 20036
|
RETURN ADDRESS: Commissioner for Trademarks 2900 Crystal Drive Arlington, VA 22202-3513 ecom110@uspto.gov
|
MARK: CE
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: N/A
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 76/333392
The Office has reassigned this application to the undersigned examining attorney.
This letter responds to the applicant's communication filed on August 16, 2002 wherein the applicant’s petition for the revival of the application was granted and applicant amended the identification of goods, clarified its filing basis, and submitted a declaration. All are acceptable and entered except the identification of goods. Therefore, the identification of goods requirement is CONTINUED for the reasons below. Also, applicant should also note the search results from the a second search of the Office records required upon the revival of the application.
The examining attorney has searched the Office records and has found no similar registered mark which bars registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. Section 1052(d). TMEP section 1105.01. Please note that the examining attorney has found a potentially conflicting pending application.
The examining attorney encloses information regarding pending Application Serial No. 78/090719. The filing date of the referenced application precedes the applicant's filing date. There may be a likelihood of confusion between the two marks under Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. Section 1052(d). If the referenced application matures into a registration, the examining attorney may refuse registration in this case under Section 2(d). 37 C.F.R. Section 2.83; TMEP section 1208.01.
The identification of goods is indefinite because the applicant uses the wording "such as." The identification of goods must be specific. The applicant should amend the identification to replace this wording with "namely." The applicant may amend to list only items that are within the scope of goods set forth in the identification. 37 C.F.R. Section 2.71(a); TMEP sections 804 and 804.08(c).
Please note that, while an application may be amended to clarify or limit the identification, additions to the identification are not permitted. 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06. Therefore, the applicant may not amend to include any goods or services that are not within the scope of the goods and services recited in the present identification.
If further information or assistance is needed in responding to this Office Action, please feel free to contact the trademark attorney listed below.
/Shari L. Sheffield/
Shari Sheffield
Trademark Attorney
Law Office 110
703-308-9110 ext. 167
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.
FOR INQUIRIES OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS OFFICE ACTION, PLEASE CONTACT THE ASSIGNED EXAMINING ATTORNEY.