Examiners Amendment

SLC

Air Techniques, Inc.

Examiners Amendment

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

 

    SERIAL NO: 76/453119

 

    APPLICANT:         Air Techniques, Inc.

 

      

 

       

 

    CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS:

JOHN A. DEMARO

RUSKIN, MOSCOU, EVANS & FALTISCHEK, P.C.

170 OLD COUNTRY ROAD

MINEOLA, NEW YORK 11501

 

RETURN ADDRESS: 

Commissioner for Trademarks

2900 Crystal Drive

Arlington, VA 22202-3514

ecom105@uspto.gov

 

 

If no fees are enclosed, the address should include the words "Box Responses - No Fee."

    MARK:          SLC

 

 

 

    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 email address.

 

 

Serial Number  76/453119

 

 

EXAMINER’S AMENDMENT

 

Please note that if the identification of goods or services has been amended below, any future amendments must be in accordance with 37 C.F.R. 2.71(a); TMEP section 1402.07(e).  No response is necessary unless there is an objection to the amendment.  If there is an objection to the amendment, the applicant should notify the examining attorney immediately.

 

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. §1052(d).  TMEP §704.02.

 

CORRECTION OF CLASSIFICATION OF GOODS

 

The examining attorney has classified "dental instruments, namely an intraoral camera" in International Class 009.  The correct classification, as indicated in the application, is International Class 010.   Accordingly, the application is corrected to reflect the proper class number.

 

The decision as to the proper classification of goods or services is a purely administrative matter which is within the sole discretion of the Patent and Trademark Office.  In re Tee-Pak, Inc., 164 USPQ 88 (TTAB 1969).

 

The examining attorney apologizes for any inconvenience that this may cause. If the applicant has any questions or needs further assistance please telephone the assigned examining attorney.

 

Finally, it is noted that according to the applicant, “SLC” does not have any significance in the relevant trade or industry as applied to the goods.

 

 

BBrown

/Brian D. Brown/

Trademark Attorney

Law Office 105

(703) 308-9105 ext. 178

(703)  746-9597fax

ecom105@uspto.gov

 


uspto.report is an independent third-party trademark research tool that is not affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or any other governmental organization. The information provided by uspto.report is based on publicly available data at the time of writing and is intended for informational purposes only.

While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information displayed on this site. The use of this site is at your own risk. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

All official trademark data, including owner information, should be verified by visiting the official USPTO website at www.uspto.gov. This site is not intended to replace professional legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for consulting with a legal professional who is knowledgeable about trademark law.

© 2024 USPTO.report | Privacy Policy | Resources | RSS Feed of Trademarks | Trademark Filings Twitter Feed