United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
|
U.S. Application Serial No. 79293885
Mark: AIR QUEEN
|
|
|
Correspondence Address: |
|
|
Applicant: LEMON CO., LTD.
|
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N/A
Correspondence Email Address: |
|
NONFINAL OFFICE ACTION
International Registration No. 1550955
Notice of Provisional Full Refusal
Deadline for responding. The USPTO must receive applicant’s response within six months of the “date on which the notification was sent to WIPO (mailing date)” located on the WIPO cover letter, or the U.S. application will be abandoned (see http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks-application-process/abandoned-applications for information on abandonment). To confirm the mailing date, go to the USPTO’s Trademark Status and Document Retrieval (TSDR) database at http://tsdr.gov.uspto.report/, select “US Serial, Registration, or Reference No.,” enter the U.S. application serial number in the blank text box, and click on “Documents.” The mailing date used to calculate the response deadline is the “Create/Mail Date” of the “IB-1rst Refusal Note.”
Respond to this Office action using the USPTO’s Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS). A link to the appropriate TEAS response form appears at the end of this Office action.
Discussion of provisional full refusal. This is a provisional full refusal of the request for extension of protection to the United States of the international registration, known in the United States as a U.S. application based on Trademark Act Section 66(a). See 15 U.S.C. §§1141f(a), 1141h(c).
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(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.
SEARCH OF USPTO DATABASE OF MARKS
I. MARK DESCRIPTION OMITTED
Applicant must submit a description of the mark, because one was not included in the application. 37 C.F.R. §2.37; see TMEP §§808.01, 808.02. Applications for marks not in standard characters must include an accurate and concise description of the entire mark that identifies all the literal and design elements. See 37 C.F.R. §2.37; TMEP §§808.01, 808.02, 808.03(b). In this case, the drawing of the mark is not in standard characters.
The following description is suggested, if accurate:
The mark consists of the stylized wording “AIR QUEEN”. An open crown appears on the “Q” and three bubbles appear above the “N”.
II. REQUIREMENT TO AMEND THE IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS
General Information
Applicant’s Website & Bona Fide Intent to Use
The attached evidence from the applicant’s website shows the applicant is using the proposed mark in connection with sanitary masks for protection against viral infection. When possible, the suggestions below are based on this evidence.
Additionally, any good the applicant does not have a bona fide intent to use the proposed mark in connection with in US commerce, even if definite and acceptable, should be struck from the identification of goods. See, M.Z. Berger & Co. v. Swatch A.G., 787 F.3d 1368, 114 USPQ2d 1892, 1900 (Fed. Cir. 2015); TMEP §1101; 3 McCarthy on Trademarks § 19.14, at 19.47-48 (4th ed. 2014).
Class 9
The wording “filters for respiratory masks” in the identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified because the nature of the goods is not clear. Any suggestion would be encompassed by “non-medical respiratory mask filters.” Therefore, the ambiguous language should be struck from the identification of goods.
The wording “photomask blanks” in the identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified because the nature of the goods is not clear. Any suggestion would be encompassed by “photomasks.” Therefore, the ambiguous language should be struck from the identification of goods.
The wording “photomasks, protection masks” in the identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified because the nature of the “protection masks” and includes sanitary masks for the protection of viral infections in Class 10. Any suggestion would be encompassed by any of the other masks already identified in the application. Therefore, the ambiguous language should be struck from the identification of goods.
The wording “protective masks” in the identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified because the nature of the goods is not clear and includes sanitary masks for the protection of viral infections in Class 10. Any suggestion would be encompassed by any of the other masks already identified in the application. Therefore, the ambiguous language should be struck from the identification of goods.
The wording “respiratory masks, other than for artificial respiration” in the identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified because the nature of the goods is not clear.
Applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate (suggestion are bold):
Class 9: Anti-pollution masks for respiratory protection; breathing masks; divers' masks; dust masks; dust masks for respiration protection; filters for respiratory masks; gas masks; photomask blanks; photomasks, protection masks; protective masks; non-medical respiratory mask filters; industrial respiratory masks, other than for artificial respiration; swimming face masks
Applicant’s goods may be clarified or limited, but may not be expanded beyond those originally itemized in the application or as acceptably narrowed. See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §§1402.06, 1904.02(c)(iv). Applicant may clarify or limit the identification by inserting qualifying language or deleting items to result in a more specific identification; however, applicant may not substitute different goods or add goods not found or encompassed by those in the original application or as acceptably narrowed. See TMEP §1402.06(a)-(b). The scope of the goods sets the outer limit for any changes to the identification and is generally determined by the ordinary meaning of the wording in the identification. TMEP §§1402.06(b), 1402.07(a)-(b). Any acceptable changes to the goods will further limit scope, and once goods are deleted, they are not permitted to be reinserted. TMEP §1402.07(e). Additionally, for applications filed under Trademark Act Section 66(a), the scope of the identification for purposes of permissible amendments is limited by the international class assigned by the International Bureau of the World Intellectual Property Organization (International Bureau). 37 C.F.R. §2.85(f); TMEP §§1402.07(a), 1904.02(c).
For assistance with identifying and classifying goods in trademark applications, please see the USPTO’s online searchable U.S. Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual. See TMEP §1402.04.
III. SIGNATURE/SUBMISSION CONSTITUTES CERTIFICATION UNDER 37 C.F.R. §11.18(b)—ADVISORY
(1) All statements made in the document of the party’s own knowledge are true, all statements made on information and belief are believed to be true, and all statements made are made with the knowledge that, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the USPTO, any party who knowingly and willfully makes any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations, is subject to the penalties under 18 U.S.C. §1001, including fines and imprisonment;
(2) To the best of the party’s knowledge, information and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, the document is not being presented for any improper purpose;
(3) All allegations or other factual contentions in the document have evidentiary support or are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and
(4) All denials of factual contentions in the document are warranted on the evidence or are reasonably based on a lack of information or belief.
See 37 C.F.R. §11.18(b); TMEP §§302, 611.01(a).
Violating 37 C.F.R. §11.18(b) may jeopardize the validity of an application and any resulting registration, and may lead the USPTO to impose sanctions and/or take other appropriate actions under 37 C.F.R. §11.18(c), which may include the following: rejecting the relevant document or according it less probative value; referring the practitioner’s conduct to the USPTO’s Office of Enrollment and Discipline for possible disciplinary action; excluding the practitioner or other party from practicing before, or otherwise submitting documents to, the USPTO; and requiring a party to be represented by a qualified practitioner in any current or future trademark matters before the USPTO.
IV. APPLICANT’S EMAIL ADDRESS REQUIRED
Email address required. Applicant must provide applicant’s email address, which is a requirement for a complete application. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(2); Mandatory Electronic Filing & Specimen Requirements, Examination Guide 1-20, at III.A. (Rev. Feb. 2020). Applicant’s email address cannot be identical to the listed primary correspondence email address of any attorney retained to represent applicant in this application. See Examination Guide 1-20, at III.A.
V. LICENSED U.S. ATTORNEY REQUIRED
Applicant must be represented by a U.S.-licensed attorney to respond to or appeal the provisional refusal. An applicant whose domicile is located outside of the United States or its territories is foreign-domiciled and must be represented by an attorney who is an active member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of a U.S. state or territory. 37 C.F.R. §§2.11(a), 11.14; Requirement of U.S.-Licensed Attorney for Foreign-Domiciled Trademark Applicants & Registrants, Examination Guide 4-19, at I.A. (Rev. Sept. 2019). An individual applicant’s domicile is the place a person resides and intends to be the person’s principal home. 37 C.F.R. §2.2(o); Examination Guide 4-19, at I.A. A juristic entity’s domicile is the principal place of business; i.e., headquarters, where a juristic entity applicant’s senior executives or officers ordinarily direct and control the entity’s activities. 37 C.F.R. §2.2(o); Examination Guide 4-19, at I.A. Because applicant is foreign-domiciled, applicant must appoint such a U.S.-licensed attorney qualified to practice under 37 C.F.R. §11.14 as its representative before the application may proceed to registration. 37 C.F.R. §2.11(a). See Hiring a U.S.-licensed trademark attorney at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks-getting-started/why-hire-private-trademark-attorney for more information.
Only a U.S.-licensed attorney can take action on an application on behalf of a foreign-domiciled applicant. 37 C.F.R. §2.11(a). Accordingly, the USPTO will not communicate further with applicant about the application beyond this Office action or permit applicant to make future submissions in this application.
To appoint or designate a U.S.-licensed attorney. To appoint an attorney, applicant should submit a completed Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) Change Address or Representation form at http://teas.gov.uspto.report/wna/ccr/car. The newly-appointed attorney must submit a TEAS Response to Examining Attorney Office Action form at http://teas.gov.uspto.report/office/roa/ indicating that an appointment of attorney has been made and address all other refusals or requirements in this action, if any. Alternatively, if applicant retains an attorney before filing the response, the attorney can respond to this Office action by using the appropriate TEAS response form and provide his or her attorney information in the form and sign it as applicant’s attorney. See 37 C.F.R. §2.17(b)(1)(ii).
For this application to proceed, applicant must explicitly address each refusal and/or requirement in this Office action. For a refusal, applicant may provide written arguments and evidence against the refusal, and may have other response options if specified above. For a requirement, applicant should set forth the changes or statements. Please see “Responding to Office Actions” and the informational video “Response to Office Action” for more information and tips on responding.
How to respond. Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action.
/Ryan Cianci/
Trademark Attorney
Law Office 116
571-270-3721
ryan.cianci@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE