To: | Invicta Watch Company of America, Inc. (h.natter@natter-natter.com) |
Subject: | U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 77335998 - ACTIVA - 07-5382-T |
Sent: | 10/30/2009 12:41:25 PM |
Sent As: | ECOM106@USPTO.GOV |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 Attachment - 5 Attachment - 6 Attachment - 7 Attachment - 8 Attachment - 9 Attachment - 10 Attachment - 11 Attachment - 12 Attachment - 13 |
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
SERIAL NO: 77/335998
MARK: ACTIVA
|
|
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: Invicta Watch Company of America, Inc.
|
|
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.
ISSUE/MAILING DATE: 10/30/2009
The application is removed from suspension and applicant is advised as follows:
SECTION 2(d) REFUSAL – LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION
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.
Here, where the marks at issue ACTIVA and ACCTIVA look, appear and sound alike, they create the same commercial impression. Thus, where the goods are “batteries” and “battery chargers” they have related purposes and when identified by such similar marks are likely to be confused with each other pursuant to Section 2(d) of the Act. See attachment. Attached are copies of printouts from the USPTO X-Search database, which show third-party registrations of marks used in connection with the same or similar goods and/or services as those of applicant and registrant in this case. These printouts have probative value to the extent that they serve to suggest that the goods and/or services listed therein, namely batteries sand battery chargers, are of a kind that may emanate from a single source. In re Infinity Broad. Corp. of Dallas,60 USPQ2d 1214, 1217-18 (TTAB 2001); In re Albert Trostel & Sons Co.,29 USPQ2d 1783, 1785-86 (TTAB 1993); In re Mucky Duck Mustard Co., 6 USPQ2d 1467, 1470 n.6 (TTAB 1988); TMEP §1207.01(d)(iii).
Please note, the cited registration resulted from previously noted Serial No. 79/050006.
The following legal authorities govern the processing of trademark and service mark applications by the Office: The Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. §§1051 et seq.; The Trademark Rules of Practice, 37 C.F.R. Part 2; and the Office’s Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (TMEP) (6th ed. 2009). These legal resources are available online at http://www.gov.uspto.report/main/trademarks.htm.
TEAS PLUS APPLICANTS MUST SUBMIT DOCUMENTS ELECTRONICALLY OR SUBMIT FEE: Applicants who filed their application online using the reduced-fee TEAS Plus application must submit certain documents electronically. In addition, such applicants must accept correspondence from the Office via e-mail throughout the examination process and maintain a valid e-mail address. 37 C.F.R. §§2.23(a), (b); TMEP §§819, 819.02(a), (b). Failure to do so will incur an additional fee of $50 per class of goods and/or services. 37 C.F.R. §2.6(a)(1)(iv); TMEP §819.04.
Therefore, applicant must submit the following documents using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) at http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/index.html: (1) responses to Office actions; (2) preliminary amendments; (3) changes of correspondence address; (4) changes of owner’s address; (5) appointments and revocations of power of attorney; (6) appointments and revocations of domestic representative; (7) amendments to allege use; (8) statements of use; (9) requests for extension of time to file a statement of use; and (10) requests to delete a Trademark Act Section 1(b) basis. If applicant files any of these documents on paper instead of via TEAS, then applicant must also submit the $50 per class fee. 37 C.F.R. §§2.6(a)(1)(iv), 2.23(a)(1); TMEP §§819.02(b), 819.04. Telephone responses that result in the issuance of an examiner’s amendment will not incur this additional fee.
/Edward Nelson/
Trademark Attorney
Law Office 106
(571) 272-9202
(fax) (571) 273-9106
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.