Offc Action Outgoing

MINED

BLUE PLANET INTERNATIONAL , INC.

Offc Action Outgoing

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

 

    SERIAL NO: 76/478994

 

    APPLICANT:                          BLUE PLANET INTERNATIONAL , INC.

 

 

        

 

    CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS:

    BLUE PLANET INTERNATIONAL, INC.

    1526 E, WASHINGTON BLVD

    LOS ANGELES, CA 90021

   

   

RETURN ADDRESS: 

Commissioner for Trademarks

2900 Crystal Drive

Arlington, VA 22202-3514

ecom108@uspto.gov

 

 

 

    MARK:          MINED

 

 

 

    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.

 

 

 

OFFICE ACTION

 

TO AVOID ABANDONMENT, WE MUST RECEIVE A PROPER RESPONSE TO THIS OFFICE ACTION WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF OUR MAILING OR E-MAILING DATE. 

 

 

Serial Number  76/478994

 

The assigned examining attorney has reviewed the referenced application and determined the following.

 

Section 2(d) - Likelihood of Confusion Refusal

 

The examining attorney refuses registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d), because the applicant’s mark, when used on or in connection with the identified goods/services, so resembles the mark in U.S. Registration No. 2,243,654 as to be likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive.  TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the enclosed registration.

 

The examining attorney must analyze each case in two steps to determine whether there is a likelihood of confusion.  First, the examining attorney must look at the marks themselves for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation and commercial impression.  In re E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973).  Second, the examining attorney must compare the goods or services to determine if they are related or if the activities surrounding their marketing are such that confusion as to origin is likely.  In re August Storck KG, 218 USPQ 823 (TTAB 1983); In re International Telephone and Telegraph Corp., 197 USPQ 910 (TTAB 1978); Guardian Products Co., v. Scott Paper Co., 200 USPQ 738 (TTAB 1978).  TMEP §§1207.01 et seq. 

 

Confusion is likely. Applicant is attempting to register the mark MINED for “ladies’ clothing” in International Class 25. Registration has been refused in view of MYNE for “wearing apparel and sportswear, namely dresses, slacks, skirts, blouses, jackets, vests, shorts, shirts, halters, suits, gauchos and knit tops” in International Class 25.

 

The marks are substantially similar in appearance, sound and meaning and since the goods are related which would be encountered by the same consumers, confusion or mistake as to origin is likely.

 

If the applicant chooses to respond to the refusal to register, the applicant must also respond to the following informalities.

 

Identification of Goods

The wording “ladies’ clothing” in the identification of goods is unacceptable as indefinite.  The applicant must amend the identification to specify the commercial name of the goods.  If there is no common commercial name for the product, the applicant must describe the product and its intended uses. TMEP §1402.01.

 

Applicant should amend the above item in the following manner:

 

         Ladies’ clothing…[specify common names of items]

 

The applicant must rewrite the identification of goods in its entirety because of the nature and extent of the amendment.  37 C.F.R. §2.74(b).

 

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.

 

Drawing

 

The drawing is not acceptable because it will not reproduce satisfactorily.  The applicant must submit a new drawing showing the mark clearly and conforming to 37 C.F.R. Section 2.52. TMEP section 807.05.

 

The requirements for a special‑form drawing, in addition to the heading, are as follows.

 

            (1) The drawing must appear in black and white; no color is permitted.

 

            (2)  Every line and letter must be black and clear.

 

            (3)  The use of gray to indicate shading is unacceptable.

 

            (4)  The lining must not be too fine or too close together.

 

(5)  The preferred size of the area in which the mark is displayed is 2 1/2 inches (6.1 cm.) high and 2 1/2 inches (6.1 cm.) wide.  In no case may it be larger than 4 inches (10.3 cm.) high or 4 inches (10.3 cm.) wide.

 

(6)  If the reduction of the mark to the required size renders any details illegible, the applicant may insert a statement in the application to describe the mark and these details.

 

37 C.F.R. Sections 2.51 and 2.52; TMEP section 807.05.  The Office will enforce these drawing requirements strictly.  TMEP section 807.

 

PRIOR FILED APPLICATION

 

The examining attorney encloses information regarding pending Application Serial No. 78/127224.  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.

 

Fee Increase

Fee increase effective January 1, 2003

Effective January 1, 2003, the fee for filing an application for trademark registration will be increased to $335.00 per International Class.  The USPTO will not accord a filing date to applications that are filed on or after that date that are not accompanied by a minimum of $335.00. 

 

Additionally, the fee for amending an existing application to add an additional class or classes of goods/services will be $335.00 per class for classes added on or after January 1, 2003.

 

 

 

/Amos T. Matthews/

Examining Attorney

Law Office 108

(703) 308-9108 ext. 293

(703) 746-8108 (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.

 

To check the status of your application at any time, visit the Office’s Trademark Applications and Registrations Retrieval (TARR) system at http://tarr.gov.uspto.report/

 

For general and other useful information about trademarks, you are encouraged to visit the Office’s web site at http://www.gov.uspto.report/main/trademarks.htm

 

FOR INQUIRIES OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS OFFICE ACTION, PLEASE CONTACT THE ASSIGNED EXAMINING ATTORNEY.

 

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]


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