To: | BDA (China) Limited (tmdocketing@raderfishman.com) |
Subject: | U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 77957450 - BDA - 65462-0074 |
Sent: | 6/27/2010 4:27:36 PM |
Sent As: | ECOM107@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 (USPTO)
OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 77957450
MARK: BDA
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: |
CLICK HERE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER: http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/eTEASpageD.htm
|
APPLICANT: BDA (China) Limited
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS: |
|
STRICT DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER
TO AVOID ABANDONMENT OF APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION, THE USPTO MUST RECEIVE APPLICANT’S COMPLETE RESPONSE TO THIS LETTER WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF THE ISSUE/MAILING DATE BELOW.
ISSUE/MAILING DATE: 6/27/2010
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
Applicant’s mark is BDA. Registrant’s mark in U.S. Registration No. 1802286 is identical to applicant’s mark. The marks are identical.
If the marks of the respective parties are identical, the relationship between the goods and/or services of the respective parties need not be as close to support a finding of likelihood of confusion as might apply where differences exist between the marks. In re Opus One Inc., 60 USPQ2d 1812, 1815 (TTAB 2001); Amcor, Inc. v. Amcor Indus., Inc., 210 USPQ 70, 78 (TTAB 1981); TMEP §1207.01(a).
As to the advertising and market research services (the services in U.S. Reg. No. 1802286), 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, advertising and market research services, 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).
The services of the parties need not be identical or directly competitive to find a likelihood of confusion. See Safety-Kleen Corp. v. Dresser Indus., Inc., 518 F.2d 1399, 1404, 186 USPQ 476, 480 (C.C.P.A. 1975); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i). Rather, they need only be related in some manner, or the conditions surrounding their marketing are such that they would be encountered by the same purchasers under circumstances that would give rise to the mistaken belief that the services come from a common source. In re Total Quality Group, Inc., 51 USPQ2d 1474, 1476 (TTAB 1999); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i); see, e.g., On-line Careline Inc. v. Am. Online Inc., 229 F.3d 1080, 1086-87, 56 USPQ2d 1471, 1475-76 (Fed. Cir. 2000); In re Martin’s Famous Pastry Shoppe, Inc., 748 F.2d 1565, 1566-68, 223 USPQ 1289, 1290 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
PRIOR PENDING APPLICATION
In response to this Office action, applicant may present arguments in support of registration by addressing the issue of the potential conflict between applicant’s mark and the mark in the referenced application. Applicant’s election not to submit arguments at this time in no way limits applicant’s right to address this issue later if a refusal under Section 2(d) issues.
Applicant must respond to the requirement(s) set forth below.
OPTION TO DELETE SECTION 1(b) BASIS
Although Section 44(d) provides a basis for filing and a priority filing date, it does not provide a basis for publication or registration. 37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(4)(iii); TMEP §§1002.02, 1003.03. It is unclear whether applicant intends to rely on Section 44(e) as an additional basis for registration.
Therefore, applicant must clarify the basis in the application by satisfying one of the following:
(1) If applicant intends to rely on Section 44(e), in addition to Section 1(b), as a basis for registration, applicant must so specify. In addition, (i) applicant’s country of origin must either be a party to a convention or treaty relating to trademarks to which the United States is also a party, or must extend reciprocal registration rights to nationals of the United States by law; and (ii) applicant must submit a true copy, photocopy, certification or certified copy of the foreign registration from applicant’s country of origin. See 15 U.S.C. §1126(b)-(c), (e); 37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(3)(ii); TMEP §§806.02(f), 1002.01, 1004. A copy of the foreign registration must be a copy of a document that issued to the applicant by or was certified by the intellectual property office in the applicant’s country of origin. TMEP §1004.01. If the foreign registration is not written in English, then applicant must provide an English translation. 37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(3)(ii). The translation should be signed by the translator. TMEP §1004.01(b). If the foreign registration has not yet issued, or applicant requires additional time to procure a copy of the foreign registration (and English translation, as appropriate), applicant should respond to this Office action requesting suspension pending receipt of the foreign registration documentation. TMEP §1003.04(b).; or
(2) If applicant intends to rely on an intent to use basis under Section 1(b), while retaining its Section 44(d) priority filing date, applicant must specify that it does not intend to rely on Section 44(e) as a basis for registration and request that the mark be approved for publication based solely on the Section 1(b) basis. See TMEP §§806.02(f), 806.04(b), 1003.04(b). Although the mark may be approved for publication on the Section 1(b) basis, it will not register until an acceptable allegation of use has been filed. See 15 U.S.C. §1051(c)-(d); 37 C.F.R. §§2.76, 2.88; TMEP §1103.
International Class 35: Strategic business consultancy; strategic business planning; strategic business management;
business management planning; business consultancy; brand business planning and strategic planning; strategic purchasing information and consultancy services; business process management and
consulting; business marketing consulting services; providing information in the fields of business management consulting, business consulting, and growth financing; market analysis; business
appraisals; consultation for business merger; consultation for personnel management; conducting business research and surveys; economic forecasting and analysis; preparing business reports; arranging and conducting conferences in the field of business and business management; advertising and promotional services; modeling for advertising or sales
promotion; business organization advice; publication of publicity texts; writing of publicity texts; personnel recruitment; opinion polling; outsourcing services; economic forecasting cost price
analysis; compilation of statistics; business management for technical projects; advisory, consultancy, information and management services relating to the foregoing
International Class 36: providing information about growth financing
MULTIPLE – CLASS APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS
Therefore, applicant must either (1) restrict the application to the number of classes covered by the fee(s) already paid, or (2) submit the fees for the additional class(es).
(1) LIST GOODS/SERVICES BY INTERNATIONAL CLASS: Applicant must list the goods and/or services by international class; and
(2) PROVIDE FEES FOR ALL INTERNATIONAL CLASSES: Applicant must submit an application filing fee for each international class of goods and/or services not covered by the fee(s) already paid (confirm current fee information at http://www.uspto.gov, click on “View Fee Schedule” under the column titled “Trademarks”).
See 15 U.S.C. §§1051(b), 1112, 1126(e); 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(2)-(3), 2.86(a); TMEP §§1403.01, 1403.02(c).
/asomerville/
Aretha Somerville
Trademark Attorney
Law Office 107
(571) 272-9414
aretha.somerville@uspto.gov
TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER: Use the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) response form at http://teasroa.gov.uspto.report/roa/. Please wait 48-72 hours from the issue/mailing date before using TEAS, to allow for necessary system updates of the application. For technical assistance with online forms, e-mail TEAS@uspto.gov.
WHO MUST SIGN THE RESPONSE: It must be personally signed by (1) an individual applicant; (2) someone with legal authority to bind applicant (i.e., a corporate officer, a general partner, all joint applicants); or (3) an authorized attorney, if one is appointed to represent applicant.
PERIODICALLY CHECK THE STATUS OF THE APPLICATION: To ensure that applicant does not miss crucial deadlines or official notices, check the status of the application every three to four months using Trademark Applications and Registrations Retrieval (TARR) at http://tarr.gov.uspto.report/. Please keep a copy of the complete TARR screen. If TARR shows no change for more than six months, call 1-800-786-9199. For more information on checking status, see http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/process/status/.
TO UPDATE CORRESPONDENCE/E-MAIL ADDRESS: Use the TEAS form at http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/eTEASpageE.htm.