UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
|
SERIAL NO: 77/640107
MARK: TEMPLAR
|
|
|
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: Mine Safety Appliances 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: 3/10/2009
The assigned trademark examining attorney has reviewed the referenced application and has determined the following:
Refusal to Register Under Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act –Likelihood of Confusion Exists Between the Proposed Mark and Cited Registration
The proposed mark is TEMPLAR for “Ballistic resistant clothing.”
The registration is TEMPLAR for “Clothing, namely, shirts, t-shirts, jerseys, sweaters, vests, jackets, pants, shorts; headgear, namely, hats and caps.”
Comparison of the Marks
The marks are identical with both being entirely comprised of the identically spelled term TEMPLAR. 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 identical sound, appearance and meaning of the marks at issue create an identical commercial meaning for consumers in the market for clothing and protective clothing which results in an overall identical and confusingly similar commercial impression that is shared by the marks in this case.
Comparison of the Goods
The applicant has identified its goods as: “Ballistic resistant clothing.”
The registrant has identified its goods as: “Clothing, namely, shirts, t-shirts, jerseys, sweaters, vests, jackets, pants, shorts; headgear, namely, hats and caps.”
It is common for producers of clothing to also produce protective clothing and for those single producers to market these goods under one mark to the same target group of consumers in the same channels of trade.
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 listed therein, namely protective clothing and shirts, t-shirts, jerseys, sweaters, vests, jackets, pants, shorts; headgear, namely, hats and caps are of a kind that may emanate from a single source. See In re Infinity Broad. Corp., 60 USPQ2d 1214, 1217-1218 (TTAB 2001); In re Albert Trostel & Sons Co., 29 USPQ2d 1783, 1785-86 (TTAB 1993); In re Mucky Duck Mustard Co., Inc., 6 USPQ2d 1467, 1470 at n.6 (TTAB 1988).
On the basis of the above, the goods of the parties are sufficiently similar such that a likelihood of confusion exists. When the confusingly similar commercial impression shared by the marks is combined with the related goods a likelihood of confusion results. Accordingly, registration of the mark sought in this application is refused under Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act in this case. Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.
If applicant has any questions about its application or needs assistance in responding to this Office Action please telephone the assigned trademark examining attorney directly at the number listed below.
/Amy C. Kean/
Trademark Attorney, Law Office 113
U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
Phone 571-272-8854
Fax: 571-273-8854
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.
