UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
SERIAL NO: 76/639357
APPLICANT: Network Solutions, LLC
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: |
RETURN ADDRESS: Commissioner for Trademarks P.O. Box 1451 Alexandria, VA 22313-1451
|
MARK: NAMESECURE
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: 27826-361
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.
|
MAILING/E-MAILING DATE INFORMATION: If the mailing or e-mailing date of this Office action does not appear above, this information can be obtained by visiting the USPTO website at http://tarr.gov.uspto.report/, inserting the application serial number, and viewing the prosecution history for the mailing date of the most recently issued Office communication.
Serial Number 76/639357
The assigned examining attorney has reviewed the referenced application and determined the following.
Section 2(d) - Likelihood of Confusion Refusal
Registration of the proposed mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the mark in U.S. Registration No. 2,555,219. Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); TMEP §§1207.01 et seq. See the enclosed registration.
Taking into account the relevant Du Pont factors, a likelihood of confusion determination in this case involves a two-part analysis. First, the marks are compared for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation and commercial impression. In re E .I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973). Second, the goods or services are compared to determine whether they are similar or related or whether the activities surrounding their marketing are such that confusion as to origin is likely. In re National Novice Hockey League, Inc., 222 USPQ 638 (TTAB 1984); In re August Storck KG, 218 USPQ 823 (TTAB 1983); In re Int’l Tel. and Tel. Corp., 197 USPQ 910 (TTAB 1978); Guardian Prods. Co., v. Scott Paper Co., 200 USPQ 738 (TTAB 1978); TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.
In this case, the applicant’s mark, NAMESECURE in stylized form, is highly similar to the registrant’s mark, NAME SECURE and design. The literal portions of both marks are identical in appearance, sound and meaning. The addition of the design element does not obviate the similarity between the marks in this case. In re Shell Oil Company, 992 F.2d 1204, 26 USPQ2d 1687 (Fed. Cir. 1993); Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc., 526 F.2d 556, 188 USPQ 105 (C.C.P.A. 1975); TMEP §1207.01(c)(ii).
Furthermore, the services are closely related and overlapping. The applicant’s services are “electronic mail services; email and website forwarding services” and “redirecting electronic mail to changed personal electronic addresses; hosting the web sites of others on a computer server for a global computer network; domain name registration for identification of users on a global computer network, renewal and account management services; domain name searching services.” The registrant’s services are “website forwarding and e-mail forwarding” and “registration of domain names for the identification of users on a global computer network.”
Because the marks are nearly identical and some of the services are identical, there is a substantial likelihood that consumers would be confused as to the source of the services.
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 mark in the cited registration has been assigned to applicant, then applicant must prove ownership of that mark. TMEP §812.01. Applicant may record the assignment with the Assignment Services Division of the Office. Trademark Act Section 10, 15 U.S.C. §1060; 37 C.F.R. §3.25; TMEP §§503 et seq. Applicant should then notify the trademark examining attorney when the assignment has been recorded.
In the alternative, applicant may submit evidence of the assignment of the mark to applicant, such as: (1) documents evidencing the chain of title; or (2) an explanation of the chain of title (specifying each party in the chain, the nature of each conveyance, and the relevant dates), supported by an affidavit or a signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20. 37 C.F.R. §3.73; TMEP §502.02(a).
The identification of services in Class 38 is acceptable.
In Class 42, the wording “renewal and account management services” is unacceptable as indefinite. The applicant may amend this wording to “domain name account management services in Class 35,” if accurate. TMEP §1402.01.
Applicant classified the services “domain name searching services” in International Class 42; however, the correct classification is International Class 35. Applicant must either delete these goods and/or services or add International Class 35 to the application. 37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(7) and 2.85; TMEP §1401.04(b).
Applicant may adopt two or more of the following identifications of services, if accurate:
Domain name searching services and domain name account management services in Class 35;
Electronic mail services, and email and website forwarding services in Class 38;
Redirecting electronic mail to changed personal electronic addresses; hosting the web sites of others on a computer server for a global computer network; domain name registration and renewal for identification of users on a global computer network in Class 42.
Please note that, while the identification of services may be amended to clarify or limit the services, adding to the services or broadening the scope of the services is not permitted. 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06. Therefore, applicant may not amend the identification to include services that are not within the scope of the services set forth in the present identification.
If applicant prosecutes this application as a combined, or multiple‑class application, then applicant must comply with each of the requirements below for those goods and/or services based on actual use in commerce under Trademark Act Section 1(a):
(1) Applicant must list the goods/services by international class with the classes listed in ascending numerical order;
(2) Applicant must submit a filing fee for each international class of goods and/or services not covered by the fee already paid (current fee information should be confirmed at http://www.uspto.gov); and
(3) For each additional class of goods and/or services, applicant must submit:
(a) dates of first use of the mark anywhere and dates of first use of the mark in commerce, or a statement that the dates of use in the initial application apply to that class; the dates of use, both anywhere and in commerce, must be at least as early as the filing date of the application;
(b) one specimen showing use of the mark for each class of goods and/or services; the specimen must have been in use in commerce at least as early as the filing date of the application;
(c) a statement that “the specimen was in use in commerce on or in connection with the goods and/or services listed in the application at least as early as the filing date of the application;” and
(d) verification of the statements in 3(a) and 3(c) in an affidavit or a signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20. (NOTE: Verification is not required where (1) the dates of use for the added class are stated to be the same as the dates of use specified in the initial application, or (2) the original specimens are acceptable for the added class.)
37 C.F.R. §§2.6, 2.34(a), 2.59, 2.71(c), and 2.86(a); TMEP §§810, 904.09, 1403.01 and 1403.02(c).
Please note that the specimen(s) of record are acceptable for class(es) 38 and 42 only.
/Ronald McMorrow/
Examining Attorney
Law Office 105
(571) 272-9306
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.