UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
SERIAL NO: 76/618391
APPLICANT: Spatial Data Analytics Corporation
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: |
RETURN ADDRESS: Commissioner for Trademarks P.O. Box 1451 Alexandria, VA 22313-1451
|
MARK: REAL TIME GIS
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: 039219.0016
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 76/618391
The assigned examining attorney has reviewed the referenced application and determined the following.
Search Results
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.
Section 2(e)(1) - Descriptive Refusal
The examining attorney refuses registration on the Principal Register because the proposed mark is merely descriptive of the identified services. Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); TMEP §§1209.01(c) et seq. Moreover, the proposed mark appears to be generic as applied to the services and, therefore, incapable of identifying the applicant’s services and distinguishing them from those of others. In re Management Recruiters International, Inc., 1 USPQ2d 1079 (TTAB 1986). Under these circumstances, the examining attorney cannot recommend an amendment to proceed under Trademark Act Section 2(f), 15 U.S.C. §1052(f), or an amendment to the Supplemental Register.
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 goods and/or 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 §1209.01(b). A mark that describes an intended user of a product or service is also merely descriptive within the meaning of Section 2(e)(1). Hunter Publishing Co. v. Caulfield Publishing Ltd., 1 USPQ2d 1996 (TTAB 1986); In re Camel Mfg. Co., Inc., 222 USPQ 1031 (TTAB 1984); In re Gentex Corp., 151 USPQ 435 (TTAB 1966).
In this case, the applicant has sought to register the proposed mark HIGH PERFORMANCE GIS for use in connection with “computer software development and design for others; computer consultation pertaining to spatial data and database systems.” The examining attorney has attached Internet evidence to show that the term HIGH PERFORMANCE GIS are used in the applicant’s industry to refer to the goods which are a product of the applicant’s services. Even the applicant’s own website uses the proposed mark in a generic fashion:
At SPADAC, we specialize in:
Registration is accordingly refused under Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1).
If the applicant has any questions, please contact the undersigned.
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.
Janice L. McMorrow
/JLM/
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 115
571-272-9194
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.