Offc Action Outgoing

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

 

 

 

OFFICE ACTION - SOU

 

RESPONSE TIME LIMIT:  TO AVOID ABANDONMENT, THE OFFICE MUST RECEIVE A PROPER RESPONSE TO THIS OFFICE ACTION WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF THE MAILING OR E-MAILING DATE. 

 

MAILING/E-MAILING DATE INFORMATION:  If the mailing or e-mailing date of this Office action does not appear above, this information can be obtained by visiting the USPTO website at http://tarr.gov.uspto.report/, inserting the application serial number, and viewing the prosecution history for the mailing date of the most recently issued Office communication.

 

Serial Number  78/498410

 

This letter responds to the applicant's communication filed on May 25, 2006.

 

Ornamental Refusal – Capable

Registration is refused on the Principal Register because the proposed mark, as used on the specimen of record, is a decorative or ornamental feature of the goods and would not be perceived as a mark by the purchasing public.  Trademark Act Sections 1, 2 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1052 and 1127; See In re Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corp., 774 F.2d 1116, 227 USPQ 417 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re David Crystal, Inc., 296 F.2d 771, 132 USPQ 1 (C.C.P.A. 1961); In re Villeroy & Boch S.A.R.L., 5 USPQ2d 1451 (TTAB 1987); TMEP §§1202.03 et seq.

 

The specimen consists of a picture of the goods, and the proposed mark is ornamental as used on the specimen because as used on the goods, the mark appears as a mere decorative picture.

 

As to the size of the proposed mark appearing on the specimens, the larger the display relative to the size of the goods, the more likely that consumers will not view the ornamental matter as a mark.  See, e.g., In re Dimitri’s Inc., 9 USPQ2d 1666, 1667 (TTAB 1988) (SUMO merely ornamental in part because the wording “appears in large lettering across the top-center portion of the T-shirts and caps”); International Order of Job’s Daughters v. Lindberg and Co., 633 F.2d 912, 208 USPQ 718 (9^th Cir. 1980), cert denied 452 U.S. 941 (1982) (prominent display on jewelry was evidence that the proposed mark was being used in a non-trademark fashion).  The mark is “large” and placed on the goods in such a way to be ornamental and not be viewed as a mark.

 

Although there is no prescribed method or place for affixation of a mark to goods, the location of a mark on the goods “is part of the environment in which the [mark] is perceived by the public and … may influence how [the mark] is perceived.”  In re Tilcon Warren Inc., 221 USPQ 86, 88 (TTAB 1984); see In re Paramount Pictures Corp., 213 USPQ 1111, 1115 (TTAB 1982).  Thus, where consumers have been conditioned to recognize trademarks in a certain location, as on the breast area of a shirt, ornamental matter placed in a different location is less likely to be perceived as an indication of source.  See TMEP §1202.03(b)

 

Applicant may overcome the stated ornamental refusal by doing one of the following, as appropriate:

 

(1)   claiming acquired distinctiveness by submitting evidence that the proposed mark has acquired distinctiveness of the applicant’s goods in commerce under Trademark Act Section 2(f), 15 U.S.C. §1052(f).  Evidence may consist of examples of advertising and promotional materials that specifically promote the subject matter for which registration is sought as a mark, dollar figures for advertising devoted to such promotion, dealer and consumer statements of recognition of the subject matter as a mark and any other evidence that establishes recognition of the matter as a mark for the goods.  See TMEP §1202.03(d);

 

(2)   claiming acquired distinctiveness through ownership of a prior U.S. registration(s) for the same mark and the same or related goods and/or services by submitting the following in an affidavit or signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20:  “The mark has become distinctive of the goods and/or services as evidenced by ownership of U.S. Registration No._______ [indicate Registration No.] on the Principal Register for the same mark for related goods or services.”  37 C.F.R. §2.41(b); TMEP §§1212.04 et seq.;

 

(3)   submitting evidence that the proposed mark is an indicator of secondary source or sponsorship for the identified goods.  University Book Store v. University of Wisconsin Board of Regents, 33 USPQ2d 1385, 1405 (TTAB 1994); In re Olin Corp., 181 USPQ 182 (TTAB 1982).  That is, applicant may submit evidence showing that the proposed mark would be recognized as a trademark or service mark through applicant’s use of the proposed mark with goods or services other than those identified here.  In re Original Red Plate Co., 223 USPQ 836, 837 (TTAB 1984).  Applicant must establish that, as a result of this use on other goods or services, the public would recognize applicant as the secondary source of, or sponsor for, the identified goods.  See TMEP §1202.03(c);

 

(4)   submitting a substitute specimen that shows proper non-ornamental trademark use, along with a statement that “the substitute specimen was in use in commerce prior to the expiration of time allowed to applicant for filing a statement of use”, verified with an affidavit or a signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20.  37 C.F.R. §2.59(b)(2); or

 

(5)   amending the application to seek registration on the Supplemental Register. Trademark Act Section 23, 15 U.S.C. §1091; 37 C.F.R. §§2.47 and 2.75(a); TMEP §§801.02(b), 815 and 816 et seq.

 

If the applicant has any questions or needs assistance in responding to this Office action, please telephone the assigned examining attorney.

 

/Gina M. Fink/

Trademark Attorney - Law Office 109

Phone: (571) 272-9275

Law Office 109 Fax: (571) 273-9109

 

 

HOW TO RESPOND TO THIS OFFICE ACTION:

• ONLINE RESPONSE:  You may respond using the Office’s Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) Response to Office action form available on our website at http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/index.html.  If the Office action issued via e-mail, you must wait 72 hours after receipt of the Office action to respond via TEAS.  NOTE:  Do not respond by e-mail.  THE USPTO WILL NOT ACCEPT AN E-MAILED RESPONSE.
• REGULAR MAIL RESPONSE:  To respond by regular mail, your response should be sent to the mailing return address above, and include the serial number, law office number, and examining attorney’s name.  NOTE:  The filing date of the response will be the date of receipt in the Office, not the postmarked date.  To ensure your response is timely, use a certificate of mailing.  37 C.F.R. §2.197.

 

STATUS OF APPLICATION: To check the status of your application, visit the Office’s Trademark Applications and Registrations Retrieval (TARR) system at http://tarr.uspto.gov.

 

VIEW APPLICATION DOCUMENTS ONLINE: Documents in the electronic file for pending applications can be viewed and downloaded online at http://portal.gov.uspto.report/external/portal/tow.

 

GENERAL TRADEMARK INFORMATION: For general information about trademarks, please visit the Office’s website at http://www.gov.uspto.report/main/trademarks.htm

 

FOR INQUIRIES OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS OFFICE ACTION, PLEASE CONTACT THE ASSIGNED EXAMINING ATTORNEY SPECIFIED ABOVE.