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 Number  78/869485

 

This letter responds to applicant’s communication filed on February 28, 2007.

 

STATUS OF APPLICATION

 

In the original Office Action, applicant was required to correct the following informalities: identification/classification of goods, and specimen drawing agreement.

 

AMENDMENT TO THE IDENTIFICATION/CLASSIFICATION OF GOODS ACCEPTABLE

 

In its response, applicant has provided and acceptable amendment to the identification of goods.

 

SPECIMEN – ORNAMENTAL REFUSAL AND MARK SHOWN IN SPECIMEN DOES NOT AGREE WITH DRAWING

 

In its response, applicant argues that the specimen of use is acceptable and does not differ from the drawing.  In support of its argument, applicant asserts that the highly descriptive wording “STREET FAIR” does not create an unitary mark with the term “FOLSOM.”  Applicant’s arguments have been carefully considered, however, the examining attorney does not find them persuasive.

 

Mark Differs on Drawing and Specimen

 

The mark on the drawing page does not agree with the mark as it appears on the specimen.  The mark submitted for registration must be a substantially exact representation of the mark that appears on the specimen.  37 C.F.R. §2.51. 

 

First, accepting applicant’s assertion that the wording “STREET FAIR” is highly descriptive does not overcome the fact that this wording is unitary with the dominant term “FOLSOM”.  The wording “STREET FAIR” is not generic or informational with respect to the identified goods, and this additional wording is a material alteration of the mark, because such an amendment to the drawing would require a further search for similar marks.  As a general rule, the addition of any element that would require a further search will constitute a material alteration. In re Pierce Foods Corp., 230 USPQ 307 (TTAB 1986).

 

Moreover, the wording “FOLSOM” and “STREET FAIR” are all contained within a rectangle carrier and are shown in the same font in close proximity to each other. 

 

Applicant may not submit an amended drawing to conform to the display on the specimen because the character of the mark would be materially altered; in other words, the mark on the specimen creates a different commercial impression from the mark on the drawing.  37 C.F.R. §2.72(a); TMEP §§807.12, 807.12(a), 807.14 et seq. and 904.09. 

 

Mark as Shown on Specimen is Ornamental and Fails to Function as a Trademark

 

Registration is refused because the proposed mark, as used on the specimen of record, does not function as a trademark to identify and distinguish applicant’s goods from those of others and to indicate their source.  Trademark Act Sections 1, 2 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051-1052 and 1127; In re Remington Prods., Inc., 3 USPQ2d 1714 (TTAB 1987); TMEP §§1202 et seq.

 

The proposed mark, as used on the specimen, does not function as a trademark because it is ornamental.

 

The proposed mark, as used on the specimen of record, is merely a decorative or ornamental feature of the goods; it does not function as a trademark to identify and distinguish applicant’s goods from those of others and to indicate their source.  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 proposed mark, as used on the specimen, is merely ornamental because the mark is prominently displayed on the jewelry and is decorative.

 

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).

 

Overcoming Specimen Refusal

 

Therefore, applicant must submit the following:

 

(1)   A substitute specimen that shows the mark that appears on the drawing; and

 

(2)   The following statement, verified with an affidavit or signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20:  “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.  If submitting a specimen requires an amendment to the dates of use, applicant must also verify the amended dates.  37 C.F.R. §2.71(c).

 

If applicant cannot satisfy the above requirements, applicant may amend the Section 1(a) filing basis (use in commerce) to Section 1(b) (intent to use basis), for which no specimen is required.  However, should applicant amend the basis to Section 1(b), registration cannot be granted until applicant later amends the application back to use in commerce by filing an acceptable allegation of use with a proper specimen.  15 U.S.C. §1051(c); 37 C.F.R. §§2.76, 2.88; TMEP Chapter 1100. 

 

In order to amend to Section 1(b), applicant must submit the following statement, verified with an affidavit or signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20:  “Applicant has had a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce on or in connection with the goods or services listed in the application as of the filing date of the application.”  15 U.S.C. §1051(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(2) and 2.35(b)(1); TMEP §806.01(b).

 

Declaration

 

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)

 

Amending Dates of Use

 

If an amendment of the dates‑of‑use clause is necessary in order to state the correct dates of first use, then applicant must verify the amendment with a notarized affidavit or a signed declaration in accordance with 37 C.F.R. §2.20.  37 C.F.R. §2.71(c).

 

 

 

/Jay C Besch/

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 108

(571) 272-8606 voice

(571) 273-9108 official fax

jay.besch@uspto.gov

 

 

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.