To: | North State Telephone Company (david.harlow@nelsonmullins.com) |
Subject: | TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 77572144 - PLEX - 18298/09007 |
Sent: | 12/22/2008 8:01:42 AM |
Sent As: | ECOM106@USPTO.GOV |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 Attachment - 5 Attachment - 6 Attachment - 7 Attachment - 8 |
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
SERIAL NO: 77/572144
MARK: PLEX
|
|
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: North State Telephone Company
|
|
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: 12/22/2008
The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney. Applicant must respond timely and completely to the issue(s) below. 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62, 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.
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.
Comparing 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).
Comparing the Services
In the present case, the applicant services are included under the broad language in Reg. No. 1685593 (i.e., telecommunications services). Further, the services listed in Reg. No 3358667 include a variety of telecommunications services.
The marks share an identical dominant element. The services are identical and/or highly related. Therefore, the similarities that exist among the marks and the services are so great as to create a likelihood of confusion among consumers.
Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration. The applicant should also note the following additional potential refusal.
Potentially Conflicting Mark
If applicant believes there is no potential conflict between this application and the earlier-filed application, then applicant may present arguments relevant to the issue in a response to this Office action. The election not to submit arguments at this time in no way limits applicant’s right to address this issue at a later point.
Action on this application will be suspended pending the disposition of Application Serial No. 78-565359, upon receipt of the applicant's response addressing the following issue. Please note, the applicant must respond to the following issues within the prescribed (6) six month time period in order to avoid abandonment.
Significance of Term
Applicant must specify whether the wording “PLEX” has any significance in the telecommunications or internet trade or industry or as applied to the services described in the application. See 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b); TMEP §§808.01(c), 814.
If the applicant has any questions or needs assistance with the present application, please telephone the assigned examining attorney.
/Jeffery C. Coward/
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 106
Phone: (571) 272-9148
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.