UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

 

 

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  76/515853

 

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

 

Search for Conflicting Marks

 

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.

 

Identification of Goods

 

Trademark Rule 2.61(b) states "The examiner may require the applicant to furnish such information and exhibits as may be reasonably necessary to the proper examination of the application".  The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board has upheld a refusal of registration based on the applicant's failure to provide information requested under this rule.  In re Babies Beat Inc., 13 USPQ2d 1729 (TTAB 1990)(failure to submit patent information regarding configuration). 

 

The examining attorney cannot determine the nature of the goods because there is insufficient information in the record.  The applicant must provide additional details as to the nature of the goods to ensure proper classification.  The applicant should also note that depending on its response, additional International Classes of goods may be required.

 

Specifically, the applicant must indicate whether the “cases” are in the nature of cardboard cartons used to hold nametags and badges, or if they are in the nature of business card cases.  Are they plastic holders used by individuals to display nametags such as might be worn at business conferences, or are the goods of a different nature entirely?

 

The applicant may wish to provide product information for the goods.  This may take the form of a fact sheet, instruction manual, advertisement, or photographs.  If unavailable, the applicant may wish to submit the information for goods of the same type, explaining how its own product will differ.

 

In any case, applicant should also note that the decision as to the proper classification of goods or services is a purely administrative matter which is within the sole discretion of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.  In re Tee‑Pak, Inc., 164 USPQ 88 (TTAB 1969).

 

If the applicant has any questions or needs assistance in responding to this Office action, please telephone the assigned examining attorney.

 

 

 

 

 

 

/Michael P. Keating/

Trademark Attorney

Law Office 113

(703) 308-9113 x232

(703) 746-8113  (fax)

ecom113@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.

 

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.