UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
SERIAL NO: 76/435329
APPLICANT: Wozniak, Martin J.
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: MICHAEL E. MAUNEY P. O. BOX 10266 SOUTHPORT, NORTH CAROLINA 28461
|
RETURN ADDRESS: Commissioner for Trademarks 2900 Crystal Drive Arlington, VA 22202-3513 ecom104@uspto.gov
|
MARK: DYNAMIC ENTRY
|
|
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 76/435329
The assigned examining attorney has reviewed the referenced application and determined the following. The examining attorney has searched the Office records and has found no similar registered or pending mark which would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. Section 1052(d). TMEP, 2nd. Edition, section 1105.01.
Descriptiveness
The examining attorney refuses registration on the Principal Register because the proposed mark merely describes the goods. Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. Section 1052(e)(1); TMEP, 2nd. Edition, section 1209 et seq. A mark is merely descriptive under Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. 1052(e)(1), if it describes an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose or use of the relevant goods. In re Gyulay, 820 F.2d 1216, 3 USPQ2d 1009 (Fed. Cir. 1987); In re Bed & Breakfast Registry, 791 F.2d 157, 229 USPQ 818 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re MetPath Inc., 223 USPQ 88 (TTAB 1984); In re Bright‑Crest, Ltd., 204 USPQ 591 (TTAB 1979); TMEP, 2nd. Edition, section 1209.01(b).
The examining attorney must consider whether a mark is merely descriptive in relation to the identified goods, not in the abstract. In re Omaha National Corp., 819 F.2d 1117, 2 USPQ2d 1859 (Fed. Cir. 1987); In re Abcor Development Corp., 588 F.2d 811, 200 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1978); In re Venture Lending Associates, 226 USPQ 285 (TTAB 1985). It is not necessary that a term describe all of the purposes, functions, characteristics or features of the goods to be merely descriptive. It is enough if the term describes one attribute of the goods. In re H.U.D.D.L.E., 216 USPQ 358 (TTAB 1982); In re MBAssociates, 180 USPQ 338 (TTAB 1973).
Applicant applied to register the mark “DYNAMIC ENTRY” for hand tools, presumably battering rams based upon Applicant’s website. In a cursory search of the web, the examining attorney has discovered ample evidence that demonstrates that the term “DYNAMIC ENTRY” is a term of art used in the law enforcement community to describe entry into buildings/dwellings/houses etc. through forcible means, namely, battering rams (see attached evidence.) Because Applicant’s mark is the term used to describe the act for which the goods are intended, the mark is descriptive and registration is denied.
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.
Informalities
If the applicant chooses to respond to the refusal to register, the applicant must also respond to the following informalities.
Identification of Goods
The identification of goods is unacceptable as indefinite. The applicant may adopt the following identification of goods, if accurate. To the extent the suggested identification of goods or services is incomplete or inaccurate, the applicant is advised that the Trademark Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual is accessible via the USPTO homepage at the following address: http://www.gov.uspto.report/web/offices/tac/doc/gsmanual/
Please also 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. Section 2.71(a); TMEP, 2nd. Edition, section 804.09. 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.
International Class 8: HAND TOOLS, NAMELY, BATTERING RAMS FOR FORCING ENTRY
If the applicant has any questions or needs assistance in responding to this Office action, please telephone the assigned examining attorney. In all correspondence to the Patent and Trademark Office, the applicant should list the name and law office of the examining attorney, the serial number of this application, the mailing date of this Office action, and the applicant’s telephone number.
/Theodore McBride/
Theodore McBride
Trademark Attorney
Law Office 104
703-308-9104 x 129
Fax: 703-746-6498
Formal Responses: ecom104@uspto.gov
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.