Offc Action Outgoing

The applicant was previously advised that the mark depicted on the specimen disagrees with the mark on the drawing. It was noted that the specimen displays the mark as GREAT MOODS AROMATHERAPY, for the wording and a design and the drawing shows the mark as GREAT MOODS AROMATHERAPY, for a different design. The applicant was then advised that it must submit the following:

(1) A substitute specimen showing the mark that appears on the drawing; and

(2) The following statement, verified with an affidavit or signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20: “The substitute specimen was in use in commerce prior to the expiration of the time allowed applicant for filing a statement of use.” 37 C.F.R. §2.59(b)(2); TMEP §904.05. If submitting a specimen requires an amendment to the dates of use, applicant must also verify the amended dates. 37 C.F.R. §2.71(c).

It was also noted that the applicant’s proposed amended drawing is unacceptable because it would materially alter the essence or character of the mark. 37 C.F.R. §2.72; TMEP §§807.14 et seq. See In re Who? Vision Systems, Inc., 57 USPQ2d 1211 (TTAB 2000) (amendment from TACILESENSE to TACTILESENSE found to be material alteration); In re CTB Inc., 52 USPQ2d 1471 (TTAB 1999) (proposed amendment of “TURBO AND DESIGN” to typed word “TURBO” is material alteration); In re Meditech International Corp., 25 USPQ2d 1159, 1160 (TTAB 1990) (“[a] drawing consisting of a single blue star, as well as a drawing consisting of a number of blue stars, would both be considered material alterations vis-à-vis a drawing consisting of the typed words ‘DESIGN OF BLUE STAR’”); In re Wine Society of America Inc., 12 USPQ2d 1139 (TTAB 1989) (proposed amendment to replace typed drawing of “THE WINE SOCIETY OF AMERICA” with a special form drawing including those words with a crown design and a banner design bearing the words “IN VINO VERITAS” held to be a material alteration); In re Nationwide Industries Inc., 6 USPQ2d 1882 (TTAB 1988) (addition of house mark “SNAP” to product mark “RUST BUSTER” held a material alteration).

The applicant has now responded to the requirement. However, the applicant’s response is unacceptable. Here, the applicant has not provided a substitute specimen. As such, the requirement that the mark differs in the drawing and specimen has not been satisfied. Moreover, because the applicant has provided an unacceptable substitute drawing that materially alters the mark. As previously noted, the mark in a drawing cannot be amended if the change would materially alter the mark. TMEP §807.14. The Office determines whether a proposed amendment materially alters a mark by comparing the proposed amendment with the drawing of the mark filed with the original application. 37 C.F.R. §2.72; TMEP §807.14(c). Here, as filed, the original mark contained a design element however in the amended drawing, the applicant has now deleted the design element. However, this deletion materially alters the mark. TMEP §807.14(e). Here, the design element is a searchable component and its removal would require republication. Contrary to the applicant’s assertion, the bamboo design element is distinctive. As related to the goods, the deleted component is neither generic nor unregistrable. Moreover, the component does not comprise informational mater.

Where republication of the amended mark would be necessary in order to provide proper notice to third parties for opposition purposes, then the mark has been materially altered and the amendment is not permitted. In re Who? Vision Systems Inc., 57 USPQ2d 1211, 1218 (TTAB 2000). “The modified mark must contain the essence of the original mark, and the new form must create the impression of being essentially the same mark.” Visa International Service Association v. Life Code Systems, Inc., 220 USPQ 740, 743 (TTAB 1983). “That is, the new and old forms of the mark must create essentially the same commercial impression.” In re Nationwide Industries Inc., 6 USPQ2d 1882, 1885 (TTAB 1988).

For the reasons above, the requirement is believed proper and is now made FINAL.

OPTIONS

If applicant does not respond within six months of the mailing date of this final Office action, the application will be abandoned. 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §2.65(a). Applicant may respond to this final Office action by:

(1) Submitting a response that fully satisfies all outstanding requirements, if feasible; 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), 2.64(a); TBMP ch. 1200; TMEP §714.04.

In certain rare circumstances, a petition to the Director may be filed pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b)(2) to review a final Office action that is limited to procedural issues. 37 C.F.R. §2.64(a); TMEP §714.04; see 37 C.F.R. §2.146(b); TBMP §1201.05; TMEP §1704 (explaining petitionable matters). The petition fee is $100. 37 C.F.R. §2.6(a)(15).

/ingrideulin/

Ingrid Eulin

Law Office 111

(571) 272-9380

RESPOND TO THIS ACTION: If there are any questions about the Office action, please contact the assigned examining attorney. A response to this Office action should be filed using the form available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/eTEASpageD.htm. If notification of this Office action was received via e-mail, no response using this form may be filed for 72 hours after receipt of the notification. Do not attempt to respond by e-mail as the USPTO does not accept e-mailed responses.

If responding by paper mail, please include the following information: the application serial number, the mark, the filing date and the name, title/position, telephone number and e-mail address of the person signing the response. Please use the following address: Commissioner for Trademarks, P.O. Box 1451, Alexandria, VA 22313-1451.

STATUS CHECK: Check the status of the application at least once every six months from the initial filing date using the USPTO Trademark Applications and Registrations Retrieval (TARR) online system at http://tarr.uspto.gov. When conducting an online status check, print and maintain a copy of the complete TARR screen. If the status of your application has not changed for more than six months, please contact the assigned examining attorney.