Offc Action Outgoing

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  76/529710.  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.

 

Refusal Based on Section 2(e)(1) - Mark is Merely Descriptive of the Services

The examining attorney refuses registration on the Principal Register because the proposed mark merely describes the services.  Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. Section 1052(e)(1); TMEP 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 services.  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 section 1209.01(b).

 

The examining attorney must consider whether a mark is merely descriptive in relation to the identified services, 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 services to be merely descriptive.  It is enough if the term describes one attribute of the services.  In re H.U.D.D.L.E., 216 USPQ 358 (TTAB 1982); In re MBAssociates, 180 USPQ 338 (TTAB 1973).

 

The attached entries taken from MSN Encarta show that “virtual” means “generated by a computer for reasons of economics, convenience, or performance,” and  “clinical” means “based on medical treatment or observation.”   The attached entry taken from Wikipedia shoes that “information system” means “a system, whether automated or manual, that comprises people, machines, and/or methods organized to collect, process, transmit, and disseminate data that represent user information.”  The applicant’s services comprise providing a virtual clinical information system.  To register a mark that combines descriptive terms, the composite must create a unitary mark with a separate, nondescriptive meaning.  In re Sun Microsystems Inc., 59 USPQ2d 1084 (TTAB 2001); In re Putman Publishing Co., 39 USPQ2d 2021 (TTAB 1996); In re Copytele Inc., 31 USPQ2d 1540 (TTAB 1994); In re Entenmann’s Inc., 15 USPQ2d 1750 (TTAB 1990), aff’d per curiam, 928 F.2d 411 (Fed. Cir. 1991); In re Serv-A-Portion Inc., 1 USPQ2d 1915 (TTAB 1986); In re Wells Fargo & Co., 231 USPQ 95 (TTAB 1986); In re Ampco Foods, Inc., 227 USPQ 331 (TTAB 1985).  TMEP §1209.03(d).  The mark VIRTUAL CLINICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM does not create a meaning separate from the meanings of the individual terms.

 

For the reasons stated above, the examining attorney finds that because the proposed mark merely describes the applicant's services, registration of the applicant's mark is barred under Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act.

 

Request for Additional Information

If the applicant chooses to respond to the refusal to register based on descriptiveness, the applicant must provide information to permit the examining attorney to reach an informed final determination concerning descriptiveness of the proposed mark.  The applicant must submit available advertising, promotional, or explanatory material concerning the services, particularly any material specifically related to the features of the mark.  The applicant may also furnish any other evidence that the applicant considers relevant to the registrability of the proposed mark.

 

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

 

Informalities

 

Filing Basis

The applicant asserts use of the mark in the application, but also refers to filing under 15 U.S.C. section 1051(b).   This statute describes the intent-to-use basis.    The applicant should indicate whether it intends to file under 15 U.S.C. section 1051(a) (use basis) or 15 U.S.C. section 1051(b) (intent-to-use basis).

 

Classification of Services

The application classifies the services incorrectly.  The applicant must amend the application to classify the services in  Class 44.  37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(7) and 2.85; TMEP §§1401.02(a) and 1401.03(b).

 

/Leigh Caroline Case/

Trademark Attorney

Office e-mail: Ecom105@uspto.gov

Office fax: (703) 872-9875

Office phone: (703) 308-9105 x 148

 

 

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.