Offc Action Outgoing

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

 

 

Serial Number  76/547433

 

 

TO AVOID ABANDONMENT, WE MUST RECEIVE A PROPER RESPONSE TO THIS OFFICE ACTION WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF OUR MAILING OR E-MAILING DATE.   FOR INQUIRIES OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS OFFICE ACTION, PLEASE CONTACT THE ASSIGNED EXAMINING ATTORNEY.

 

OFFICE ACTION

 

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, so resembles the mark in U.S. Registration No. 1,965,832 as to be likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive.  TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the enclosed registration.

 

Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act bars registration where a mark so resembles a registered mark, that it is likely, when applied to the goods, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake or to deceive. TMEP §1207.01.  The Court in In re E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973), listed the principal factors to consider in determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion.  Among these factors are the similarity of the marks as to appearance, sound, meaning and commercial impression and the similarity of the goods.  The overriding concern is to prevent buyer confusion as to the source of the goods.  Miss Universe, Inc. v. Miss Teen U.S.A., Inc., 209 USPQ 698 (N.D. Ga. 1980).  Therefore, any doubt as to the existence of a likelihood of confusion must be resolved in favor of the registrant.  Lone Star Mfg. Co. v. Bill Beasley, Inc., 498 F.2d 906, 182 USPQ 368 (C.C.P.A. 1974). 

 

The applicants’ mark is similar to the registered mark in appearance, sound and meaning.  The applicants’ mark “GHOSTHUNTER” and design merely adds the term “HUNTER” to the registered mark “GHOST.”  The mere addition of a term to a registered mark is not sufficient to overcome a likelihood of confusion under Section 2(d).  Coca‑Cola Bottling Co. v. Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc., 526 F.2d 556, 188 USPQ 105 (C.C.P.A. 1975) (“BENGAL” and “BENGAL LANCER”); Lilly Pulitzer, Inc. v. Lilli Ann Corp., 376 F.2d 324, 153 USPQ 406 (C.C.P.A. 1967) (“THE LILLY” and “LILLI ANN”); In re El Torito Restaurants Inc., 9 USPQ2d 2002 (TTAB 1988) (“MACHO” and “MACHO COMBOS”); In re United States Shoe Corp., 229 USPQ 707 (TTAB 1985) (“CAREER IMAGE” and “CREST CAREER IMAGES”); In re Corning Glass Works, 229 USPQ 65 (TTAB 1985) (“CONFIRM” and “CONFIRMCELLS”); In re Riddle, 225 USPQ 630 (TTAB 1985) (“ACCUTUNE” and “RICHARD PETTY’S ACCU TUNE”); In re Cosvetic Laboratories, Inc., 202 USPQ 842 (TTAB 1979) (“HEAD START” and “HEAD START COSVETIC”).  TMEP §1207.01(b)(iii). 

 

The applicants’ mark also features a design element.  When a mark consists of a word portion and a design portion, the word portion is more likely to be impressed upon a purchaser’s memory and to be used in calling for the goods or services. In re Appetito Provisions Co., 3 USPQ2d 1553 (TTAB 1987); Amoco Oil Co. v. Amerco, Inc., 192 USPQ 729 (TTAB 1976).  TMEP §1207.01(c)(ii).  Therefore, the word portion is the more dominant portion of applicant’s mark. 

 

Turning to the goods of the parties, the applicants indicate use  of their mark on “bottled rabbit urine used for a cover scent in hunting.”  The registrant uses its mark on “hunter’s scent neutralizer and camouflage.”  Although the registrant has not described the material composition of its goods, it must be presumed that the registrant’s goods could include the more specifically identified “rabbit urine” of the applicants. It is well settled that the issue of likelihood of confusion between marks must be determined on the basis of the goods or services as they are identified in the application and the registration. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Wells Fargo Bank, 811 F.2d 1490, 1 USPQ2d 1813 (Fed. Cir. 1987); Paula Payne Products Co. v. Johnson Publishing Co., Inc., 473 F.2d 901, 177 USPQ 76 (C.C.P.A. 1973).  Since the identification of the registrant’s goods is very broad, it is presumed that the registration encompasses all goods of the type described, including those in the applicant’s more specific identification, that they move in all normal channels of trade and that they are available to all potential customers.  In re Elbaum, 211 USPQ 639, 640 (TTAB 1981).  TMEP §1207.01(a)(iii). 

 

As the marks of the parties are highly similar, and the goods of the parties are closely related if not identical, there exists a likelihood of confusion as to the source of the goods, and registration is refused.

 

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 applicants choose to respond to the refusal to register, the applicant must also respond to the following informalities.

 

INAPPROPRIATE RELIANCE ON BOTH SECTIONS 1(a) AND 1(b)

 

The applicants assert use of the mark in commerce for “bottled rabbit urine used for a cover scent in hunting” and applicants assert that they have a bona fide intent to use the mark in commerce for the same goods.  An applicant may not assert both use of the mark in commerce, under Trademark Act Section 1(a), 15 U.S.C. §1051(a), and intent to use the mark in commerce, under Trademark Act Section 1(b), 15 U.S.C. §1051(b), for the same goods or services.  37 C.F.R. §2.34(b)(1); TMEP §806.02(b).  The applicants must delete one basis. See requirement under SPECIMEN OF USE below for further information regarding Section 1(a) versus Section 1(b) requirements.

 

DRAWING

 

The drawing is not acceptable because it will not reproduce satisfactorily.  The applicants must submit a new drawing showing the mark clearly and conforming to 37 C.F.R. §2.52.  TMEP §807.07(a).

 

The requirements for a special‑form drawing 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 2½ inches (6.1 cm.) high and 2½ inches (6.1 cm.) wide.  It should not 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. §2.52; TMEP §§807.01(b) and 807.07(a).  The Office will enforce these drawing requirements strictly. 

 

The Office prefers that the drawing be depicted on a separate sheet of smooth, nonshiny, white paper 8 to 8½ inches (20.3 to 21.6 cm.) wide and 11 inches (27.9 cm.) long, and that the sheet contain a heading listing, on separate lines, the applicant’s complete name; the applicant’s address; the goods or services recited in the application; and, if the application is filed under Section 1(a) of the Act, the dates of first use of the mark and of first use of the mark in commerce; or, if the application is filed under Section 44(d), the priority filing date of the foreign application.  37 C.F.R. §2.52(b); TMEP §§807.01(a), 807.01(b), 807.01(c) and 807.07(a).

 

NOTE:  The Trademark Rules pertaining to drawings were amended on November 2, 2003.  For applications filed prior to November 2, 2003, applicants may follow either the new special form drawing rules or the special form drawing rules in force prior to their amendment on November 2, 2003.  Exam Guide 01-03, section I.B.6.

 

The new requirements for a special-form drawing are as follows:

 

·        The drawing must appear in black and white if color is not claimed as a feature of the mark, or in color if color is claimed as a feature of the mark.

 

·        Drawings must be typed or made with a pen or by a process that will provide high definition when copied.  A photolithographic, printer’s proof copy, or other high quality reproduction of the mark may be used.  All lines must be clean, sharp and solid, and must not be fine or crowded.

 

·        The image must be no larger than 3.15 inches (8 cm) high by 3.15 inches (8cm) wide.

 

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

 

37 C.F.R. §§2.52(b); See TMEP §§807.01(b) and 807.07(a).

 

If submitted on paper, the Office prefers that the drawing be depicted on a separate sheet of non-shiny, white paper that is 8 to 8.5 inches wide and 11 to 11.69 inches long (20.3 to 21.6 cm. wide and 27.9 to 29.7 cm. long).  One of the shorter sides of the sheet should be regarded as its top edge. In addition, the drawing should include the caption “DRAWING PAGE” at the top of the drawing beginning one-inch (2.5 cm) from the top edge.  37 C.F.R. §2.54.

 

To submit a special form drawing electronically, applicants must attach a digitized image of the mark to the submission.  The Office will only accept an image in .jpg format.  The image must be formatted at no less than 300 dots per inch and no more than 350 dots per inch; and with a length and width of no less than 250 pixels and no more than 944 pixels.  All lines in the image must be clean, sharp and solid, and not fine or crowded, and produce a high quality image when copied.  37 C.F.R. §2.53.

 

The Office strictly enforces these drawing requirements.

 

SPECIMEN OF USE

 

An application based on use of the mark in commerce under Trademark Act Section 1(a), 15 U.S.C. §1051(a), must include a specimen showing use of the mark in commerce on or in connection with the goods.  TMEP §904.  The application does not contain a specimen.  The applicants must submit a specimen, and must submit the following statement:

 

The specimen was in use in commerce at least as early as the filing date of the application.

 

This statement must be verified with an affidavit or a declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20.  37 C.F.R. §2.59(a); TMEP §904.09.

 

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 following is a properly worded declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20.  At the end of the response, the applicants should insert the declaration signed by a person authorized to sign under 37 C.F.R. §2.33(a).

 

The undersigned, being hereby warned that willful false statements and the like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under 18 U.S.C. §1001, and that such willful false statements may jeopardize the validity of the application or any resulting registration, declares that the facts set forth in this application are true; all statements made of his/her own knowledge are true; and all statements made on information and belief are believed to be true.

 

 

_____________________________

(Signature)

 

_____________________________

(Print or Type Name and Position)

 

_____________________________

(Date)

 

 

 

If the applicants cannot comply with the requirement for a specimen of use for the use in commerce basis asserted, the applicant may substitute a different basis for filing if the applicant can meet the requirements for the new basis.  See TMEP §§806.03 et seq.

 

In this case, the applicants may wish to amend the application to assert a bona fide intent to use the mark in commerce under Section 1(b), 15 U.S.C. Section 1051(b).

 

To base the application on a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce, the applicant must submit the following statement:

 

The applicants have had a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce on or in connection with the goods listed in the application since the filing date of the application.

 

This statement must be verified, i.e., supported either by an affidavit or by a declaration under 37 C.F.R. §§2.20 and 2.33.  Trademark Act Section 1(b), 15 U.S.C. §1051(b);  37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(2)(i); TMEP §806.01(b).

 

 

RESPONSE

 

No set form is required for response to this Office action.  The applicant must respond to each point raised.  The applicant should simply set forth the required changes or statements and request that the Office enter them.  The applicant must sign the response.  In addition to the identifying information required at the beginning of this letter, the applicant should provide a telephone number to speed up further processing.

 

In all correspondence to the Patent and Trademark Office, the applicant should list the name and law office of the examining attorney, the serial number of this application, the mailing date of this Office action, and the applicant's telephone number.

 

The applicant may wish to hire a trademark attorney because of the technicalities involved in the application.  The Patent and Trademark Office cannot aid in the selection of an attorney.  37 C.F.R. §2.11. 

 

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

 

 

 

                                                         Jennifer Chicoski

Jennifer D. Chicoski

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 115

(703) 308-9115 x117

(703) 872-9208 - Fax

jennifer.chicoski@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