UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

 

 

EXAMINER’S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY ACTION

 

 

RESPONSE TIME LIMIT:  To avoid abandonment, the Office must receive a proper response to this Office action within 6 months of the mailing or e-mailing date.  If applicant responds to the issues below within two months of the above mailing or e-mailing date, this case will be given priority handling. 

 

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.

 

ADVISORY – AMENDMENTS TO GOODS/SERVICES:  If the identification of goods and/or services has been amended below, any future amendments must be in accordance with 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a) and TMEP §1402.07(e).

 

QUESTIONS:  Please contact the assigned trademark examining attorney with any questions.

 

 

Serial Number 76/654445

 

EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT

 

AMENDMENT(S) AUTHORIZED:  As authorized by Karen Pasquale on May 24, 2006, the application is amended as noted below.  If applicant disagrees with or objects to any of the amendments below, please notify the undersigned trademark examining attorney immediately.  Otherwise, no response is necessary.  TMEP §707.   

 

The following standard character drawing claim is added to the record:  “The mark consists of standard characters without claim to any particular font, style, size, or color.”  37 C.F.R. §2.52(a); TMEP §807.03(a).

 

The following disclaimer statement is added to the record:  “No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “NETWORK” apart from the mark as shown.”  15 U.S.C. §1056; TMEP §§1213, 1213.03(a) and 1213.08(a)(i).

 

 

PRIORITY ACTION

 

Applicant must respond to each refusal and/or requirement raised below.  If applicant responds to the issues below within two months of the above mailing or e-mailing date, this case will be given priority handling.  TMEP §§708.01 and 708.05.

 

The assigned trademark examining attorney has reviewed the referenced application and has determined the following:

 

Trademark Act Section 2(d) Refusal to Register

 

Registration of the proposed mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the mark in U.S. Registration No. 2390328.  Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the enclosed registration.

 

The examining attorney must analyze each case in two steps to determine whether there is a likelihood of confusion.  First, the examining attorney must look at the marks themselves for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation and commercial impression.  In re E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973).  Second, the examining attorney must compare the goods or services to determine if they are related or if the activities surrounding their marketing are such that confusion as to origin is likely.  In re August Storck KG, 218 USPQ 823 (TTAB 1983); In re International Telephone and Telegraph Corp., 197 USPQ 910 (TTAB 1978); Guardian Products Co., v. Scott Paper Co., 200 USPQ 738 (TTAB 1978).  TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.   Any doubt regarding a likelihood of confusion is resolved in favor of the prior registrant.  Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Packard Press Inc., 281 F.3d 1261, 62 USPQ2d 1001, 1004 (Fed. Cir. 2002); In re Hyper Shoppes (Ohio), Inc., 837 F.2d 463, 6 USPQ2d 1025 (Fed. Cir. 1988); TMEP §§1207.01(d)(i).

 

The marks are compared for similarities in sound, appearance, meaning or connotation.  In re E .I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973).  Similarity in any one of these elements may be sufficient to find a likelihood of confusion.  In re White Swan Ltd., 8 USPQ2d 1534, 1536 (TTAB 1988); In re Lamson Oil Co., 6 USPQ2d 1041, 1043 (TTAB 1987); In re Mack, 197 USPQ 755 (TTAB 1977); TMEP §1207.01(b). 

 

The goods and/or services of the parties need not be identical or directly competitive to find a likelihood of confusion.  Instead, they need only be related in some manner, or the conditions surrounding their marketing be such that they could be encountered by the same purchasers under circumstances that could give rise to the mistaken belief that the goods and/or services come from a common source.  On-line Careline Inc. v. America Online Inc., 229 F.3d 1080, 56 USPQ2d 1471 (Fed. Cir. 2000); In re Martin’s Famous Pastry Shoppe, Inc., 748 F.2d 1565, 223 USPQ 1289 (Fed. Cir. 1984); In re Melville Corp., 18 USPQ2d 1386, 1388 (TTAB 1991); In re Corning Glass Works, 229 USPQ 65 (TTAB 1985); In re Rexel Inc., 223 USPQ 830 (TTAB 1984); Guardian Prods. Co., Inc. v. Scott Paper Co., 200 USPQ 738 (TTAB 1978); In re Int’l Tel. & Tel. Corp., 197 USPQ 910 (TTAB 1978); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i).

 

Applicant seeks registration for THE OXYGEN NETWORK.  Registrant’s mark is OXYGEN.  Both marks are similar in sound, appearance, and meaning in that both marks are comprised of the word “oxygen.”  Applicant’s services are identical to registrant’s services.  Therefore, consumers would likely be confused by the display of similar marks used in conjunction with identical services.  Accordingly, registration is refused.

 

Ownership of Cited 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.

 

If applicant and registrant are subsidiaries controlled by a single parent corporation or are wholly owned by the other, applicant must submit documentation explaining ownership of the cited registration.  TMEP §1201.03. 

 

Identification of Services

 

The wording “providing on-line chat rooms and electronic bulletin boards for transmission of messages among computer users” in the identification of services is unacceptable as indefinite because it is too broad.  TMEP §1402.01.  Applicant must specify the subject matter of the chat rooms and bulletin boars.  Applicant may adopt the following, if accurate:

 

Class  038:       providing on-line chat rooms and electronic bulletin boards for transmission of messages among computer users concerning {INDICATE SUBJECT MATTER OR GENERAL INTEREST}

 

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.

 

For assistance with identifying and classifying goods and/or services in trademark applications, please see the online searchable Manual of Acceptable Identifications of Goods and Services at http://tess2.gov.uspto.report/netahtml/tidm.html.

  

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).

 

 

 

 

/Dannean J Hetzel/

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 106

Phone - 571-272-8858

Fax     - 571-273-9106

 

 

 

 

HOW TO RESPOND TO THIS OFFICE ACTION:

·            ONLINE RESPONSE:  You may respond using the Office’s Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) Response to Office action form available on our website at http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/index.html.  If the Office action issued via e-mail, you must wait 72 hours after receipt of the Office action to respond via TEAS.  NOTE:  Do not respond by e-mail.  THE USPTO WILL NOT ACCEPT AN E-MAILED RESPONSE.

·            REGULAR MAIL RESPONSE:  To respond by regular mail, your response should be sent to the mailing return address above, and include the serial number, law office number, and examining attorney’s name.  NOTE:  The filing date of the response will be the date of receipt in the Office, not the postmarked date.  To ensure your response is timely, use a certificate of mailing.  37 C.F.R. §2.197.

 

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