To: | Stadeker, Wilkie J. (bill.warren@sablaw.com) |
Subject: | TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 77010659 - THE ONESTEP PROPHY ANGLE - 21270-0008 |
Sent: | 3/12/2007 12:56:14 PM |
Sent As: | ECOM107@USPTO.GOV |
Attachments: |
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
SERIAL NO: 77/010659
APPLICANT: Stadeker, Wilkie J.
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: |
RETURN ADDRESS: Commissioner for Trademarks P.O. Box 1451 Alexandria, VA 22313-1451
|
MARK: THE ONESTEP PROPHY ANGLE
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: 21270-0008
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 77/010659
The assigned trademark examining attorney has reviewed the referenced application and has determined the following:
Search Results
The Office records have been searched and no similar registered or pending mark has been found that would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d). TMEP §704.02.
Registration is refused because the proposed mark merely describes a function of applicant’s goods and/or services. Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); TMEP §§1209 et seq.
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).
Applicant proposes the mark “THE ONESTEP PROPHY ANGLES” for intended use in connection with “Dental cleaning instruments, namely prophy angles.”
The phrase ONESTEP merely describes the function of applicant’s goods, i.e., the dental tool works in one step, rather than multiple steps, to complete a job. Relevant consumers would immediately understand the function of the product, without having to use a multi-step reasoning process. Further, “PROPHY ANGLE” is the generic name for the goods, the addition of which, will not preclude a merely descriptive refusal.
Terms that describe the function or purpose of a product or service may be merely descriptive or generic under 15 U.S.C. §1051(e)(1). In re Gould Paper Corp., 834 F.2d 1017, 5 USPQ2d 1110 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (SCREENWIPE held generic for an anti-static cloth used for cleaning computer and television screens); In re Central Sprinkler Co., 49 USPQ2d 1194 (TTAB 1998) (ATTIC generic for sprinklers installed primarily in attics); In re Reckitt & Colman, North America Inc., 18 USPQ2d 1389 (TTAB 1991) (PERMA PRESS generic for soil and stain removers for use on permanent press products); In re Wallyball, Inc., 222 USPQ 87 (TTAB 1984) (WALLYBALL held descriptive of sports clothing and game equipment); In re National Presto Industries, Inc., 197 USPQ 188 (TTAB 1977) (BURGER held merely descriptive of cooking utensils); In re Orleans Wines, Ltd., 196 USPQ 516 (TTAB 1977) (BREADSPRED held merely descriptive of jams and jellies).
Although the trademark examining attorney has refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal to register by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.
If applicant chooses to respond to the refusal(s) to register, then applicant must also respond to the following requirement(s).
Amendment to Supplemental Register
Although an amendment to the Supplemental Register would normally be an appropriate response to this refusal, such a response is not appropriate in the present case until an acceptable allegation of use is filed. The instant application was filed under Trademark Act Section 1(b), 15 U.S.C. §1051(b), and is not eligible for registration on the Supplemental Register until an acceptable amendment to allege use under 37 C.F.R. §2.76 or statement of use under 37 C.F.R. §2.88 has been timely filed. 37 C.F.R. §2.47(d); TMEP §815.02, 816.02 and 1102.03.
If applicant files an allegation of use and also amends to the Supplemental Register, please note that the effective filing date of the application will then be the date of filing of the allegation of use. 37 C.F.R. §2.75(b); TMEP §§206.01 and 816.02.
Benefits of Supplemental Registration
Although Supplemental Register registration does not afford all the benefits of registration on the Principal Register, it does provide the following advantages:
Response to Office Action
There is no required format or form for responding to this Office action. The Office recommends applicants use the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) to respond to Office actions online at http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/index.html. However, if applicant responds on paper via regular mail, the response should include the following information: (1) the name and law office number of the examining attorney; (2) the serial number of this application; (3) the mailing date of this Office action; and (4) applicant's telephone number.
/David A. Hoffman/
Examining Attorney
Law Office 107
(Ph) 571-272-8805
(Fx) 571-273-8805
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.