UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
|
SERIAL NO: 76/613916
APPLICANT: RADLOVIC, MICHAEL
|
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: |
RETURN ADDRESS: Commissioner for Trademarks P.O. Box 1451 Alexandria, VA 22313-1451
|
|
MARK: PROTEGE
|
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: N/A
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.
|
Serial Number 76/613916
The assigned examining attorney has reviewed the referenced application and determined the following.
The Office records have been searched and no similar registered or pending mark has been found that would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d). TMEP §704.02.
The specimen is unacceptable as evidence of actual service mark use because it does not show clear use of the mark in connection with the identified services. A specimen is unacceptable if it does not show use of the service mark in relation to the identified service. Intermed Communications, Inc. v. Chaney, 197 USPQ 501 (TTAB 1977). The specimen must show use of the mark “in the sale or advertising of services.” Trademark Act Section 45, 15 U.S.C. §1127; In re Universal Oil Products Co., 476 F.2d 653, 177 USPQ 456 (C.C.P.A. 1973); TMEP §§1301.04 et seq. Therefore, the specimen must show the mark in reference to the particular services identified.
In this case, the specimen appears to be an image of a credit card bearing the mark with no reference to applicant’s transactional services. Use of the mark solely on credit cards would not constitute evidence of use since applicant has not identified “credit card services” in general, but specific ancillary services relating to credit cards and check transactions. Please note that, while the identification of services may be amended to clarify or limit the services, applicant may not amend the identification to include services that are not within the scope of the services set forth in the present identification.
The applicant must submit a specimen showing the mark as it is actually used in commerce in connection with the identified services. 37 C.F.R. §2.56. Examples of acceptable specimens are signs, photographs, brochures or advertisements that show the mark used in the sale or advertising of the authorization and processing services. TMEP §§1301.04 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 at least as early as the filing date of the application. 37 C.F.R. §2.59(a); TMEP §904.09.
The following is a sample declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20 with a supporting statement for a substitute specimen:
The undersigned being warned that willful false statements and the like are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under 18 U.S.C. §1001, and that such willful false statements and the like may jeopardize the validity of the application or document or any registration resulting there from, declares that the substitute specimen was in use in commerce at least as early as the filing date of the application; 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)
Pending an adequate response to the above, the examining attorney refuses registration under Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, 3 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1052, 1053 and 1127, because the record does not show use of the proposed mark as a service mark. TMEP §§904.11 and 1301.02 et seq.
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.
If the applicant has any questions or needs assistance in responding to this Office action, please telephone the assigned examining attorney.
/Steven M. Perez/
Trademark Attorney
Law Office 112
(571) 272-5888
steven.perez@uspto.gov
HOW TO RESPOND TO THIS OFFICE ACTION:
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.