UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

 

 

 

OFFICE 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. 

 

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  77/014793

 

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

 

I. SEARCH OF THE OFFICE RECORDS

 

Trademark Act Section 2(d) Refusal to Register

The examining attorney refuses registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d), because the applicant’s mark, when used on or in connection with the identified goods/services, so resembles the mark in U.S. Registration No.   2902082 as to be likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive.  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).

Applicant’s Mark is Similar in Appearance, Sound and Connotation to Registered Mark

Applicant's standard character mark is “BEVERAGE SPECTRUM”.  Applicant’s mark is identical in appearance, sound and connotation to the literal elements of registrants mark, “BEVERAGE SPECTRUM” in that they share the common literal elements BEVERAGE and SPECTRUM. Marks need only be similar in appearance or sound or connotation to satisfy the similarity requirement of a likelihood of confusion analysis.

 

Furthermore, when a mark consists of a word portion and a design portion, the word portion is more likely to be impressed upon a purchaser’s memory and to be used in calling for the goods or services.  Therefore, the word portion is normally accorded greater weight in determining likelihood of confusion.  In re Dakin’s Miniatures Inc., 59 USPQ2d 1593, 1596 (TTAB 1999); In re Appetito Provisions Co., 3 USPQ2d 1553 (TTAB 1987); Amoco Oil Co. v. Amerco, Inc., 192 USPQ 729 (TTAB 1976); TMEP §1207.01(c)(ii). Accordingly, the minimal stylization of the registrant’s mark does not obviate similarity of the identical literal elements of the marks.

 

Applicant’s Goods are Related to Goods of Registered Mark

The goods/services of the parties need not be identical or directly competitive to find a likelihood of confusion.  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/services come from a common source.  In re Martin’s Famous Pastry Shoppe, Inc., 748 F.2d 1565, 223 USPQ 1289 (Fed. Cir. 1984); In re Corning Glass Works, 229 USPQ 65 (TTAB 1985); In re Rexel Inc., 223 USPQ 830 (TTAB 1984); Guardian Products Co., Inc. v. Scott Paper Co., 200 USPQ 738 (TTAB 1978); In re International Telephone & Telegraph Corp., 197 USPQ 910 (TTAB 1978).  TMEP §1207.01(a)(i). 

 

Applicant’s goods are identified as “Printed publications and magazines and providing a website containing information, reviews and news and an on-line periodically published magazine concerning the beverage industry.”

 

Registrant’s goods are identified as “Printed publications, namely, magazines containing information related to the beverage industry.”

 

Applicant’s goods include goods listed in the registrant’s identification. Thus, the goods are related.

 

Because the marks are highly similar and the goods overlap, confusion as to source is likely. Accordingly, registration is refused under Trademark Act Section 2 (d) based on a likelihood of confusion.

 

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 applicant chooses to respond to the refusal to register, then applicant must also respond to the following requirements.

 

 

II. REQUIREMENTS

 

Substitute Specimen Required

The specimen is not acceptable for the class 016 goods because the digitized image cannot be printed or did not print legibly due to technical difficulties and does not clearly show the applied-for mark in use in commerce for the identified goods and/or services. An application based on Section 1(a) of the Trademark Act must include a specimen showing the applied-for mark in use in commerce for each class of goods and/or services. Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, 3 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051-1053 and 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv) and 2.56; TMEP §904.

 

Therefore, applicant must satisfy one of the following:

 

(1)   Submit a true and unaltered copy of the originally submitted specimen, and a statement by the person who transmitted the application to the Office that the resubmitted specimen is a true copy of the specimen that was submitted with the application. TMEP §904.02.

 

(2)   Submit a substitute specimen showing use of the mark for each class of goods and/or services based on used in commerce, and 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 at least as early as the filing date of the application.” 37 C.F.R. §2.59(a); TMEP §904.09. 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).

 

 

Examples of specimens for goods are tags, labels, instruction manuals, containers, photographs that show the mark on the goods or packaging, or displays associated with the goods at their point of sale. TMEP §§904.04 et seq. Examples of specimens for services are signs, photographs, brochures, website printouts or advertisements that show the mark used in the sale or advertising of the services. TMEP §§1301.04 et seq.

 

If applicant cannot satisfy one of the above requirements, applicant may amend the Section 1(a) filing basis (use in commerce) to Section 1(b) (intent to use basis), for which no specimen is required. However, should applicant amend the basis to Section 1(b), registration cannot be granted until applicant later amends the application back to use in commerce by filing an acceptable allegation of use with a proper specimen. 15 U.S.C. §1051(c); 37 C.F.R. §§2.76, 2.88; TMEP Chapter 1100.

 

In order to amend to Section 1(b), applicant must submit the following statement, verified with an affidavit or signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20: “Applicant has had a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce on or in connection with the goods or services listed in the application as of the filing date of the application.” 15 U.S.C. §1051(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(2) and 2.35(b)(1); TMEP §806.01(b).

 

Pending a proper response, registration is refused because applicant has not provided evidence of use in commerce of the applied-for mark. 15 U.S.C. §§1051-1053 and 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv) and 2.56; TMEP §904.

 

Identification of Goods- Wording too Broad or Indefinite

The wording “providing a website containing information, reviews and news and an on-line periodically published magazine concerning the beverage industry” in the identification of goods needs clarification because it is too broad or indefinite and could include goods classified in other international classes. TMEP §§1402.01 and 1402.03.

 

In the identification of goods, applicant must use the common commercial or generic names for the goods, be as complete and specific as possible, and avoid the use of indefinite words and phrases. If applicant chooses to use indefinite terms such as "accessories," "components," "devices," "equipment," "materials," "parts," "systems" and "products," then such terms must be followed by the word "namely" and a list of the specific goods identified by their common commercial or generic names. TMEP §§1402.01 and 1402.03(a).

 

To meet this requirement, applicant may adopt the following identification of goods and services, if accurate:

 

International Class 009: Electronic publications, namely, an on-line periodically published magazine concerning the beverage industry

 

International Class 016: “Printed publications and magazines containing information, reviews and news concerning the beverage industry”

 

International Class 032: “providing a website containing information, reviews and news and an on-line periodically published magazine concerning the non-alcoholic beverage industry”

 

TMEP §1402.01.

 

Please note: While the identification of goods may be amended to clarify or limit the goods, adding to the goods or broadening the scope of the goods is not permitted. 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06. Therefore, applicant may not amend the identification to include goods that are not within the scope of the goods set forth in the present identification.

 

For assistance with identifying 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.

 

Requirements for a Combined Application

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 applicant’s specimen is NOT acceptable for International Classes 032 and 009 because they are illegible.

 

Suggested Amendment of Identification Requires Amendment of Classification

If applicant adopts the suggested amendment of the goods and/or services, then applicant must amend the classification to add International Class 009 and 032. 37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(7) and 2.85; TMEP §§805 and 1401 et seq.

 

 

Disclaimer

Applicant must insert a disclaimer of BEVERAGE in the application because the term is merely descriptive of a the subject matter of applicant’s goods or services and does not carry any inherent source indicating value.  Trademark Act Section 6, 15 U.S.C. §1056; TMEP §§1213 and 1213.08(a)(i).  See the attached definition from MSN Encarta® Dictionary On-line that shows BEVERAGE merely describes a drink other than water.

 

A disclaimer does not physically remove the disclaimed matter from the mark, but rather is a written statement that applicant does not claim exclusive rights to the disclaimed wording and/or design separate and apart from the mark as shown in the drawing. The following is the accepted standard format for a disclaimer:

 

No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “BEVERAGE” apart from the mark as shown.

 

 

Applicant’s Response

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.

 

The response should address each refusal and/or requirement raised in the Office action. If a refusal has issued, applicant may wish to argue against the refusal, i.e., submit arguments and/or evidence as to why the refusal should be withdrawn and why the mark should register. To respond to requirements, applicant should simply set forth in writing the required changes or statements and request that the Office enter them into the application record.

 

The response must be signed by applicant or someone with legal authority to bind applicant (i.e., a corporate officer of a corporate applicant, the equivalent of an officer for unincorporated organizations or limited liability company applicants, a general partner of a partnership applicant, each applicant for applications with multiple individual applicants, etc.). TMEP §§712 et seq.

 

           

 

 

/Anthony M. Rinker/

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 102

571-272-5491

 

 

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

 

FOR INQUIRIES OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS OFFICE ACTION, PLEASE CONTACT THE ASSIGNED EXAMINING ATTORNEY SPECIFIED ABOVE.