UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
SERIAL NO: 76/689976
MARK: LIVE LAUGH LOVE
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: |
RESPOND TO THIS ACTION: http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/eTEASpageD.htm
GENERAL TRADEMARK INFORMATION: http://www.gov.uspto.report/main/trademarks.htm
|
APPLICANT: Broadway Kleer-Guard Corp.
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS: |
|
TO AVOID ABANDONMENT, THE OFFICE MUST RECEIVE A PROPER RESPONSE TO THIS OFFICE ACTION WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF THE ISSUE/MAILING DATE.
THIS IS A FINAL ACTION.
This letter is in response to applicant’s communication filed March 03, 2010. The requirement for a description of the mark is satisfied and is now withdraw. The likelihood of confusion refusal is maintained and made final.
LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION REFUSAL
While the applicant seeks to register the mark LIVE LAUGH LOVE with a design for “general purpose plastic bags; paper bags; non-woven bags, namely, plastic shopping bags; plastic bags for packaging,” “tote bags, canvas shopping bags,” “polypropylene bags used for the storage of clothes and shoes; jute bags,” the registered marks are used as follows.
The cited registrations, all owned by the same registrant are used as follows:
3385179 LIVE LAUGH LOVE for “beach bags”
3484806 LIVE LAUGH LOVE LIFE for “calendars; loose leaf binders; notepads; stickers; holiday cards”
3495341 LIVE LAUGH LOVE for “on-line retail store services featuring general merchandise and general consumer goods”
3498959 LIVE LAUGH LOVE for “computerized on-line ordering featuring general merchandise and general consumer goods”
3498963 LIVELAUGHLOVE.COM for “computerized on-line ordering featuring general merchandise and general consumer goods”
In this case, the following factors are the most relevant: similarity of the marks, similarity of the goods and/or services, and similarity of trade channels of the goods and/or services. See In re Opus One, Inc., 60 USPQ2d 1812 (TTAB 2001); In re Dakin’s Miniatures Inc., 59 USPQ2d 1593 (TTAB 1999); In re Azteca Rest. Enters., Inc., 50 USPQ2d 1209 (TTAB 1999); TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.
COMPARISON OF THE MARKS
In a likelihood of confusion determination, the marks are compared for similarities in their appearance, sound, meaning or connotation and commercial impression. In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 1361, 177 USPQ 563, 567 (C.C.P.A. 1973); TMEP §1207.01(b). Similarity in any one of these elements may be sufficient to find a likelihood of confusion. In re White Swan Ltd., 8 USPQ2d 1534, 1535 (TTAB 1988); In re Lamson Oil Co., 6 USPQ2d 1041, 1043 (TTAB 1987); see TMEP §1207.01(b).
The marks are compared in their entireties under a Trademark Act Section 2(d) analysis. See TMEP §1207.01(b). Nevertheless, one feature of a mark may be recognized as more significant in creating a commercial impression. Greater weight is given to that dominant feature in determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion. In re Nat’l Data Corp., 753 F.2d 1056, 224 USPQ 749 (Fed. Cir. 1985); Tektronix, Inc. v. Daktronics, Inc., 534 F.2d 915, 189 USPQ 693 (C.C.P.A. 1976); In re J.M. Originals Inc., 6 USPQ2d 1393 (TTAB 1987); see TMEP §1207.01(b)(viii), (c)(ii).
The dominant portion of the applicant mark and the registrant’s marks is the wording “LIVE LAUGH LOVE.” Overall, the marks have the same commercial impression.
COMPARISON OF THE GOODS AND SERVICES
The applicant’s goods, namely, “general purpose plastic bags; paper bags; non-woven bags, namely, plastic shopping bags; plastic bags for packaging,” “tote bags, canvas shopping bags,” “polypropylene bags used for the storage of clothes and shoes; jute bags,” are related to the registrant’s goods and services, namely, “beach bags,” “calendars; loose leaf binders; notepads; stickers; holiday cards,” “on-line retail store services featuring general merchandise and general consumer goods,” and “computerized on-line ordering featuring general merchandise and general consumer goods” because these goods and services are the type of goods and services that are likely to travel in the same channels of trade. Accordingly, the goods and services would be available to the same class of purchasers and would be encountered under circumstances leading one to mistakenly believe that they originate from the same source. The examining attorney previously attached Internet website evidence which showed that the parties’ goods and services travel through the same channels of trade.
Since the marks are similar and the goods/services are related, there is a likelihood of confusion as to the source of applicant’s goods/services. Therefore, applicant’s mark is not entitled to registration.
This refusal is maintained and made final.
PROPER RESPONSE TO FINAL OFFICE ACTION
(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).
/Evelyn Bradley/
Evelyn Bradley
Trademark Examiner
Law Office 105
(571) 272-9292
RESPOND TO THIS ACTION: Applicant should file a response to this Office action online using the form at http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/eTEASpageD.htm, waiting 48-72 hours if applicant received notification of the Office action via e-mail. For technical assistance with the form, please e-mail TEAS@uspto.gov. For questions about the Office action itself, please contact the assigned examining attorney. Do not respond to this Office action by e-mail; 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.