Offc Action Outgoing

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

 

 

 

OFFICE ACTION

 

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 78/784980

 

REMINDER:  TEAS PLUS APPLICANTS MUST SUBMIT DOCUMENTS ELECTRONICALLY OR SUBMIT FEE:  TEAS Plus applicants should submit the following documents using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) at http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/index.html:  (1) written responses to Office actions; (2) preliminary amendments; (3) changes of correspondence address; (4) changes of owner’s address; (5) appointments and revocations of attorney; (6) amendments to allege use; (7) statements of use; (8) requests for extension of time to file a statement of use, and (9) requests to delete a §1(b) basis.  If any of these documents are filed on paper, they must be accompanied by a $50 per class fee.  37 C.F.R. §§2.6(a)(1)(iv) and 2.23(a)(i).  Telephone responses will not incur an additional fee.  NOTE:  In addition to the above, applicant must also continue to accept correspondence from the Office via e-mail throughout the examination process in order to avoid the additional fee.  37 C.F.R. §2.23(a)(2).

 

The assigned examining attorney has reviewed the referenced application and determined the following.

 

Search Results

 

The Office records have been searched and no similar registered or pending mark has been found that would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).  TMEP §704.02.

 

Identification of Goods

 

The identification of goods is unacceptable as indefinite because the “fill-in” information provided by applicant is too vague. For example, the wording “computer software for communication, organization and entertainment” is too broad as the subject matter of the data organized must be specified, or how the goods are used to communicate (computer software for data encryption would be acceptable) and the type of entertainment such as downloadable computer games must be specified.  The entire identification must be amended to indicate with more specificity the exact function of the software.     TMEP §1402.01.

 

When an applicant has submitted an indefinite identification of goods or services, it is Office practice to suggest an acceptable identification.  In this case, however, the examining attorney cannot determine the nature of the goods because there is insufficient information in the record.

 

Please note that, while an application may be amended to clarify or limit the identification, additions to the identification are not permitted.  37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06.  Therefore, the applicant may not amend to include any goods that are not within the scope of goods set forth in the present identification.

 

Specimen

 

The specimen is unacceptable as evidence of actual trademark use because it is a webpage which is akin to an advertisement.  Invoices, announcements, order forms, bills of lading, leaflets, brochures, publicity releases and other printed advertising material generally are not acceptable specimens.  In re Bright of America, Inc., 205 USPQ 63 (TTAB 1979); TMEP §§904.05 and 904.07.  See In re Ultraflight Inc., 221 USPQ 903 (TTAB 1984).  The applicant must submit a specimen showing the mark as it is used in commerce.  37 C.F.R. §2.56.  Examples of acceptable specimens are tags, labels, instruction manuals, containers, and photographs that show the mark on the goods or packaging.  TMEP §§904.04 et seq.  The applicant must verify, with an affidavit or a declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20, that the substitute specimen was in use in commerce at least as early as the filing date of the application.  37 C.F.R. §2.59(a); TMEP §904.09.

 

For applicant’s information, a printed or web catalog or similar specimen is only acceptable to show trademark use if it includes (1) a picture of the relevant goods, (2) the mark appearing sufficiently near the picture of the goods so as to associate the mark with the goods, and (3) information necessary to order the goods (e.g., sales form, price list, instructions for ordering, etc.).  In re Dell Inc., 71 USPQ2d 1725 (TTAB 2004); see Lands’ End Inc. v. Manbeck, 797 F. Supp. 511, 24 USPQ2d 1314 (E.D. Va. 1992); In re MediaShare Corporation, 43 USPQ2d 1304 (TTAB 1997); TMEP §904.06(a)-(b).

 

The following is a sample declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20 with a supporting statement for a substitute specimen:

 

The undersigned being warned that willful false statements and the like are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under 18 U.S.C. §1001, and that such willful false statements and the like may jeopardize the validity of the application or document or any registration resulting there from, declares that the substitute specimen was in use in commerce at least as early as the filing date of the application; all statements made of his/her own knowledge are true; and all statements made on information and belief are believed to be true.

 

 

_____________________________

(Signature)

 

_____________________________

(Print or Type Name and Position)

 

_____________________________

(Date)

 

 

Pending an adequate response to the above, registration is refused because the specimen of record does not show use of the proposed mark as a trademark.  Trademark Act Sections 1, 2 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1052 and 1127; TMEP §§904.11 and 1202 et seq.

 

If the applicant cannot comply with the requirement for a proper specimen for the use basis asserted, the applicant may substitute a different basis for filing if the applicant can meet the requirements for the new basis.  See TMEP §§806.03 et seq.

 

In this case, the applicant may wish to amend the application to assert an intent to use basis.

 

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

 

/Nora Buchanan Will/

Examining Attorney

Law Office 116

ph 571-272-9135

fax 571-273-9116

 

 

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.