Offc Action Outgoing

CARLOS TO-GO

Southern Auto Sales, Inc.

Offc Action Outgoing

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

 

    SERIAL NO:           76/531750

 

    APPLICANT:         Southern Auto Sales, Inc.

 

 

        

*76531750*

    CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS:

  ARTHUR F. DIONNE

  MCCORMICK, PAULDING & HUBER LLP

  CITYPLACE II

  185 ASYLUM STREET

  HARTFORD, CT 06103-3402

RETURN ADDRESS: 

Commissioner for Trademarks

P.O. Box 1451

Alexandria, VA 22313-1451

 

 

 

 

    MARK:       CARLOS TO-GO

 

 

 

    CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO:   6116-06

 

    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.

 

 

 

FINAL OFFICE ACTION

 

RESPONSE TIME LIMIT:  TO AVOID ABANDONMENT, THE OFFICE MUST RECEIVE A PROPER RESPONSE TO THIS OFFICE ACTION WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF THE MAILING OR E-MAILING DATE. 

 

 

Serial Number  76/531750

 

This letter responds to the applicant's communication filed on April 19, 2005.

 

Specimen – Final Requirement

 

The substitute specimen is unacceptable as evidence of actual trademark use because it fails to show use of the mark on the goods. 

 

The applicant indicates that the substitute specimen is a page from its website containing instructions on how to download its software.   The applicant contends that under TMEP section 904.04(d) that this specimen is acceptable to show use of the mark on computer software.  The examining attorney respectfully disagrees; the substitute specimen does not comply with the requirements for web page to be an acceptable specimen to show use of a mark on computer software.

 

TMEP section 904.04(d) says the following:

 

For downloadable computer software, the applicant may submit a specimen that shows use of the mark on an Internet website. However, such a specimen is acceptable only if the specimen itself indicates that the user can download the software from the website (e.g., if the specimen shows a download button). If the website simply advertises the software without providing a way to download it, the specimen is unacceptable.

 

While the substitute specimen does indeed indicate that the software is downloadable, it does not appear to be downloadable from the submitted web page.  The applicant indicates that this website is “discussing the availability of its CARLOS TO-GO software,” and “provides a way to acquire the software, i.e., by contacting Dealer Technology Support.”  That is, the software does not appear to be downloadable from this actual website – there is no download button.  The submitted material is simply advertising the software and its availability, but does not actually provide a way to download it.  The substitute specimen is therefore unacceptable under TMEP section 904.04(d).

 

Therefore, the applicant must submit a specimen showing the mark as used in commerce.  37 C.F.R. §§2.56 and 2.88(b)(2).  Examples of acceptable specimens are tags, labels, instruction manuals, containers or photographs that show the mark on the goods or packaging.  TMEP §904.04 et seq.  The applicant must verify, with an affidavit or a declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20, that the substitute specimen was in use in commerce prior to the expiration of the time allowed to the applicant for filing a statement of use.  Jim Dandy Co. v. Siler City Mills, Inc., 209 USPQ 764 (TTAB 1981); 37 C.F.R. §2.59(b); TMEP §§904.09 and 1109.09(b).

 

If an amendment of the dates‑of‑use clause is necessary in order to state the correct dates of first use, the applicant must verify the amendment with an affidavit or a declaration in accordance with 37 C.F.R. §2.20.  37 C.F.R. §2.71(c); TMEP §903.05.

 

The statement supporting use of the substitute specimen must read as follows: 

 

The substitute specimen was in use in commerce prior to the expiration of the time allowed to the applicant for filing a statement of use. 

 

The applicant must sign this statement either in affidavit form or with a declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20; TMEP §§904.09 and 1109.09(b). 

 

Responding to a Final Office Action

 

If applicant fails to respond to this final action within six months of the mailing date, the application will be abandoned.  15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §2.65(a).  Applicant may respond to this final action by: 

 

(1)     submitting a response that fully satisfies all outstanding requirements, if feasible (37 C.F.R. §2.64(a)); and/or

(2)     filing an appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, with an appeal fee of $100 per class (37 C.F.R. §§2.6(a)(18) and 2.64(a); TMEP §§715.01 and 1501 et seq.; TBMP Chapter 1200).

 

In certain circumstances, a petition to the Director may be filed to review a final action that is limited to procedural issues, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b)(2).  37 C.F.R. §2.64(a).  See 37 C.F.R. §2.146(b), TMEP §1704, and TBMP Chapter 1201.05 for an explanation of petitionable matter.  The petition fee is $100.  37 C.F.R. §2.6(a)(15).

 

 

 

 

NOTICE:  FEE CHANGE   

 

Effective January 31, 2005 and pursuant to the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005, Pub. L. 108-447, the following are the fees that will be charged for filing a trademark application:

 

(1) $325 per international class if filed electronically using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS); or 

 

(2)   $375 per international class if filed on paper

 

These fees will be charged not only when a new application is filed, but also when payments are made to add classes to an existing application. If such payments are submitted with a TEAS response, the fee will be  $325 per class, and if such payments are made with a paper response, the fee will be $375 per class.

 

The new fee requirements will apply to any fees filed on or after January 31, 2005.

 

NOTICE:  TRADEMARK OPERATION RELOCATION

 

The Trademark Operation has relocated to Alexandria, Virginia.  Effective October 4, 2004, all Trademark-related paper mail (except documents sent to the Assignment Services Division for recordation, certain documents filed under the Madrid Protocol, and requests for copies of trademark documents) must be sent to:

 

Commissioner for Trademarks

P.O. Box 1451

Alexandria, VA  22313-1451

 

Applicants, attorneys and other Trademark customers are strongly encouraged to correspond with the USPTO online via the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), at http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/index.html.

 

 

/Susan Kastriner Lawrence/

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 116

(571) 272-9186

 

 

HOW TO RESPOND TO THIS OFFICE ACTION:

  • ONLINE RESPONSE:  You may respond formally using the Office’s Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) Response to Office Action form (visit http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/index.html and follow the instructions, but if the Office Action issued via email you must wait 72 hours after receipt of the Office Action to respond via TEAS).
  • REGULAR MAIL RESPONSE:  To respond by regular mail, your response should be sent to the mailing return address above and include the serial number, law office number and examining attorney’s name in your response.

 

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

 

VIEW APPLICATION DOCUMENTS ONLINE: Documents in the electronic file for pending applications can be viewed and downloaded online at http://portal.gov.uspto.report/external/portal/tow.

 

GENERAL TRADEMARK INFORMATION: For general information about trademarks, please visit the Office’s website at http://www.gov.uspto.report/main/trademarks.htm

 

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

 


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