PTO Form 2194 (Rev 9/2005) |
OMB No. 0651-0054 (Exp. 11/30/2008) |
Input Field |
Entered |
---|---|
SERIAL NUMBER | 77663419 |
LAW OFFICE ASSIGNED | LAW OFFICE 109 |
DATE OF NOTICE OF ABANDONMENT | 11/19/2009 |
PETITION | |
PETITION STATEMENT | Applicant has firsthand knowledge that the failure to respond to the Office Action by the specified deadline was unintentional, and requests the USPTO to revive the abandoned application. |
RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION | |
MARK SECTION (no change) | |
ARGUMENT(S) | |
Applicant inadvertently believed that the USPTO had suspended this application, as it had with its associated "Power Pro" word mark under application no. 77663408. After receiving the notice of abandonment, the applicant learned the USPTO office action stated that it reserved the right to suspend, but it hasn't been suspended. This was entirely unintentional. With respect to the office action, applicant believes there is no potential conflict between the mark subject of this application and the mark that is subject of application no. 76692361 ("Other Mark"), primarily because of the associated good/service and the appearance of the marks. First, Applicant's mark covers power operated log splitters, and does not involve retail services in any way. In contrast, the Other Mark is for a distributor or retail service, not a product, and it merely "features" outdoor power equipment, but does not necessarily cover log splitters whatsoever, and even if it does, it would be presumably one of many pieces of equipment. Second, applicant's mark is a distinctly stylized mark with emphasis on the a yellow/black combination, with a prominent shield with a red border. In contrast, the Other Mark has no color and is the appearance of a metal sign. Applicant believes there would be no confusion by consumers between the two marks.
|
|
ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS SECTION | |
MISCELLANEOUS STATEMENT | The colors white and gray represent background, outlining, shading and/or transparent areas and are not part of the mark. |
PAYMENT SECTION | |
TOTAL AMOUNT | 100 |
TOTAL FEES DUE | 100 |
SIGNATURE SECTION | |
RESPONSE SIGNATURE | /ryan arney/ |
SIGNATORY'S NAME | ryan arney |
SIGNATORY'S POSITION | attorney |
DATE SIGNED | 12/21/2009 |
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY | YES |
FILING INFORMATION SECTION | |
SUBMIT DATE | Mon Dec 21 11:32:22 EST 2009 |
TEAS STAMP | USPTO/POA-XXX.XX.XXX.XX-2 0091221113222021075-77663 419-460b45b9971ab24efa199 9239c91ee448-DA-8606-2009 1221111458716103 |
PTO Form 2194 (Rev 9/2005) |
OMB No. 0651-0054 (Exp. 11/30/2008) |
Applicant inadvertently believed that the USPTO had suspended this application, as it had with its associated "Power Pro" word mark under application no. 77663408. After receiving the notice of abandonment, the applicant learned the USPTO office action stated that it reserved the right to suspend, but it hasn't been suspended. This was entirely unintentional.
With respect to the office action, applicant believes there is no potential conflict between the mark subject of this application and the mark that is subject of application no. 76692361 ("Other Mark"), primarily because of the associated good/service and the appearance of the marks. First, Applicant's mark covers power operated log splitters, and does not involve retail services in any way. In contrast, the Other Mark is for a distributor or retail service, not a product, and it merely "features" outdoor power equipment, but does not necessarily cover log splitters whatsoever, and even if it does, it would be presumably one of many pieces of equipment. Second, applicant's mark is a distinctly stylized mark with emphasis on the a yellow/black combination, with a prominent shield with a red border. In contrast, the Other Mark has no color and is the appearance of a metal sign. Applicant believes there would be no confusion by consumers between the two marks.