To: | Ieyasu of Tokyo, Inc. (tsaitta@rtlaw.com) |
Subject: | TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 76517909 - SHOGUN - N/A |
Sent: | 1/8/04 8:26:38 PM |
Sent As: | ECom111 |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 |
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
SERIAL NO: 76/517909
APPLICANT: Ieyasu of Tokyo, Inc.
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: THOMAS C. SAITTA ROGERS TOWERS, P.A. 1301 RIVERPLACE BLVD., SUITE 1500 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32207
|
RETURN ADDRESS: Commissioner for Trademarks 2900 Crystal Drive Arlington, VA 22202-3514 ecom111@uspto.gov
|
MARK: SHOGUN
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: N/A
CORRESPONDENT EMAIL ADDRESS: tsaitta@rtlaw.com |
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 76/517909
The assigned examining attorney has reviewed the referenced application and determined the following.
LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION
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. 1357027 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.
The applicant's mark is SHOGUN AND DESIGN. The registrant's mark is SHOGUN AND DESIGN. The word portions of the marks are identical in sound and commercial impression. Additionally, the design portions of the marks produce a similar commercial impression. Therefore, the first prong of the likelihood of confusion test is met.
The second prong of the likelihood of confusion test is a comparison of the goods and or services. The applicant's goods are “food sauces and prepared and package food, frozen food.” The registrant's goods are “meat, namely, frozen beef offals for sale in bulk for further processing or cooking.” The goods of the parties need not be identical or directly competitive to find a likelihood of confusion. They need only be related in some manner, or the conditions surrounding their marketing be such, that they could be encountered by the same purchasers under circumstances that could give rise to the mistaken belief that the goods/services come from a common source. In re Martin’s Famous Pastry Shoppe, Inc., 748 F.2d 1565, 223 USPQ 1289 (Fed. Cir. 1984); In re Corning Glass Works, 229 USPQ 65 (TTAB 1985); In re Rexel Inc., 223 USPQ 830 (TTAB 1984); Guardian Products Co., Inc. v. Scott Paper Co., 200 USPQ 738 (TTAB 1978); In re International Telephone & Telegraph Corp., 197 USPQ 910 (TTAB 1978). TMEP §1207.01(a)(i).
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.
If the applicant chooses to respond to the refusal to register, the applicant must also respond to the following informalities.
The identification of goods is unacceptable as indefinite because it does not identify the goods in a manner that allows for proper classification. The applicant must amend the identification to specify the common commercial name of the goods. If there is no common commercial name, the applicant must describe the product and its intended uses. TMEP §1402.01. The applicant may adopt the following identification of goods, if accurate: prepared and packaged food namely, ________(specify items, e.g., vegetables, meat, seafood), frozen food namely (specify e.g., vegetables, meat, seafood); in class 29 and/or prepared and packaged food namely, (specify e.g., pasta); frozen food namely (specify e.g., pizza); food sauces, in class 30.
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 that are not within the scope of goods set forth in the present identification.
For assistance with identifying goods and/or services in trademark applications, please see the online searchable Manual of Acceptable Identifications of Goods and Services at http://www.gov.uspto.report/web/offices/tac/doc/gsmanual/.
The examining attorney encloses information regarding pending Application Serial No. 76-347605. 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. §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. §2.83; TMEP §1208.01.
/Darlene D. Johnson/
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 111
(703)308-9111 ext. 145
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.