| Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. PTO Form 1957 (Rev 10/2011) |
| OMB No. 0651-0050 (Exp 09/20/2020) |
| Input Field |
Entered |
|---|---|
| SERIAL NUMBER | 79210050 |
| LAW OFFICE ASSIGNED | LAW OFFICE 113 |
| MARK SECTION | |
| MARK | http://uspto.report/TM/79210050/mark.png |
| LITERAL ELEMENT | TRUSTI |
| STANDARD CHARACTERS | YES |
| USPTO-GENERATED IMAGE | YES |
| MARK STATEMENT | The mark consists of standard characters, without claim to any particular font style, size or color. |
| OWNER SECTION (current) | |
| NAME | Antahi Innovations Limited |
| INTERNAL ADDRESS | 179 Taylor Street, |
| STREET | Leamington; Cambridge 3434 |
| COUNTRY | New Zealand |
| OWNER SECTION (proposed) | |
| NAME | Antahi Innovations Limited |
| INTERNAL ADDRESS | 179 Taylor Street, |
| STREET | Leamington; Cambridge 3434 |
| COUNTRY | New Zealand |
| XXXX | |
| AUTHORIZED TO COMMUNICATE VIA E-MAIL | Yes |
| LEGAL ENTITY SECTION (current) | |
| TYPE | limited liability company |
| STATE/COUNTRY WHERE LEGALLY ORGANIZED | New Zealand |
| LEGAL ENTITY SECTION (proposed) | |
| TYPE | limited company (ltd.) |
| STATE/COUNTRY WHERE LEGALLY ORGANIZED | New Zealand |
| ARGUMENT(S) | |
|
The examining attorney has denied registration of the proposed mark TRUSTI for the services in International Class 044 on the ground that it is confusingly similar to the marks in Registration Nos. 3,873,893 and 4,180,151, namely, TRUSTY VET and TRUSTY VET AFFORDABLE PET CARE for veterinary services; pet grooming services under Trademark Act Section 2(d). However, although the examining attorney has denied registration of the proposed mark, the examining attorney has advised in the Office Action that the applicant may overcome the Section 2(d) refusal by deleting the services in Class 044 from the application. The applicant disagrees with the examining attorney's conclusion that a likelihood of confusion exists between the proposed mark and the cited registered marks. However, in an effort to advance the proposed mark to registration, the applicant respectfully requests that the services in Class 044 be deleted from the application. The deletion of said class is not an admission that the Section 2(d) refusal is appropriate or that a likelihood of confusion exists between the proposed mark and the cited registered marks, but is merely a means to advance the mark to registration. |
|
| GOODS AND/OR SERVICES SECTION (010)(no change) | |
| GOODS AND/OR SERVICES SECTION (044)(class deleted) | |
| SIGNATURE SECTION | |
| RESPONSE SIGNATURE | /cmbaker/ |
| SIGNATORY'S NAME | Christine M. Baker |
| SIGNATORY'S POSITION | Attorney for Applicant |
| SIGNATORY'S PHONE NUMBER | 617 542 6000 ext. 522796 |
| DATE SIGNED | 10/16/2017 |
| AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY | YES |
| FILING INFORMATION SECTION | |
| SUBMIT DATE | Tue Oct 17 00:31:32 EDT 2017 |
| TEAS STAMP | USPTO/ROA-XX.XXX.XXX.XXX- 20171017003132364888-7921 0050-5101449379ed7bc6ca77 138c1f29c2d9a1b4327e75733 7c83a454d7a68df8e44-N/A-N /A-20171017000012194381 |
| Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. PTO Form 1957 (Rev 10/2011) |
| OMB No. 0651-0050 (Exp 09/20/2020) |
The examining attorney has denied registration of the proposed mark TRUSTI for the services in International Class 044 on the ground that it is confusingly similar to the marks in Registration Nos. 3,873,893 and 4,180,151, namely, TRUSTY VET and TRUSTY VET AFFORDABLE PET CARE for veterinary services; pet grooming services under Trademark Act Section 2(d). However, although the examining attorney has denied registration of the proposed mark, the examining attorney has advised in the Office Action that the applicant may overcome the Section 2(d) refusal by deleting the services in Class 044 from the application.
The applicant disagrees with the examining attorney's conclusion that a likelihood of confusion exists between the proposed mark and the cited registered marks. However, in an effort to advance the proposed mark to registration, the applicant respectfully requests that the services in Class 044 be deleted from the application. The deletion of said class is not an admission that the Section 2(d) refusal is appropriate or that a likelihood of confusion exists between the proposed mark and the cited registered marks, but is merely a means to advance the mark to registration.