Offc Action Outgoing

BIGFOOT

CleverReach GmbH & Co. KG

Offc Action Outgoing

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application

 

U.S. Application Serial No. 79296915

 

Mark:  BIGFOOT

 

 

 

 

Correspondence Address: 

Jabbusch Siekmann & Wasiljeff

Hauptstr. 85

26131 Oldenburg

FED REP GERMANY

 

 

 

Applicant:  CleverReach GmbH & Co. KG

 

 

 

Reference/Docket No. N/A

 

Correspondence Email Address: 

 

 

 

 

NONFINAL OFFICE ACTION

 

International Registration No. 1557803

 

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.

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES:

 

  1. Action on the Merits Deferred
  2. Requirement to Amend the Identification of Goods & Services
  3. Signature/Submission Constitutes Certification under 37 C.F.R. §11.18(b)—Advisory
  4. Applicant’s Email Address Required
  5. Licensed U.S. Attorney Required

 

I.                   ACTION ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE DEFERRED

 

A search of the USPTO database of registered and pending marks for potentially conflicting marksis deferred because applicant’s goods and/or services are so indefinite that a proper search cannot be conducted.  TMEP §704.02.  Until applicant submits a sufficiently definite identification of goods and/or services as required elsewhere in this Office action, action on the merits is deferred with respect to likelihood of confusion under Trademark Act Section 2(d).  TMEP §704.02; see 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).

 

II.                REQUIREMENT TO AMEND THE IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS & SERVICES

 

General Information

 

A.    Applicant’s Website & Bona Fide Intent to Use

 

The attached evidence from the applicant’s website shows the applicant is an email marketing firm and is using the proposed mark is developing a software for its own benefit that is used for email marketing.  When possible, the suggestions below are based on this evidence.

 

Additionally, any good or service 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 and services.  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). 

 

B.     Brackets

 

The identification of goods and/or services contains brackets.  Generally, applicants should not use parentheses and brackets in identifications in their applications so as to avoid confusion with the USPTO’s practice of using parentheses and brackets in registrations to indicate goods and/or services that have been deleted from registrations or in an affidavit of incontestability to indicate goods and/or services not claimed.  See TMEP §1402.12.  The only exception is that parenthetical information is permitted in identifications in an application if it serves to explain or translate the matter immediately preceding the parenthetical phrase in such a way that it does not affect the clarity or scope of the identification, e.g., “fried tofu pieces (abura-age).”  Id.

 

Therefore, applicant must remove the brackets from the identification and incorporate any parenthetical or bracketed information into the description of the goods and/or services.

 

C.     Software

 

Software in an identification of goods or services  must specify (1) the purpose or function of the software and its content or field of use, if content- or field- specific; and (2) whether its format is downloadable, recorded, or online non-downloadable.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.03(d), 1402.11(a).  Downloadable and recorded goods are in International Class 9, whereas providing their temporary, online non-downloadable use is a service in International Class 42; except for non-downloadable game software provided online or for temporary use, which is in International Class 41.  See TMEP §§1402.03(d), 1402.11(a)(xii).

 

The USPTO requires such specificity in order for a trademark examining attorney to examine the application properly and make appropriate decisions concerning possible conflicts between the applicant’s mark and other marks.  See In re N.A.D. Inc., 57 USPQ2d 1872, 1874 (TTAB 2000); TMEP §1402.03(d). 

 

Therefore, the applicant must define the format and/or function of all software in the application.  Any redundant iterations of software should be struck from the identification of goods or services for brevity.

 

D.    Services are Rendered for the Benefit of Others

 

To be a service, an activity must be primarily for the benefit of someone other than the applicant.  While an advertising agency provides a service when it promotes the goods or services of its clients, a company that promotes the sale of its own goods or services is doing so for its own benefit rather than rendering a service for others.   In re Reichhold Chems., Inc., 167 USPQ 376 (TTAB 1970); See TMEP §1301.01(b)(i).  

 

Because services are provided for the benefit of third parties, any service identified below, even if definite and acceptable, must be rendered for the benefit of a party other than the applicant.  Thus, any services that are not rendered for the benefit of a third party should be struck from the identification of services.

 

Class 9

 

Applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate (suggestion are bold):

 

            Class 9: Application software for cloud computing services; cloud server software; Downloadable cloud computing software for sending marketing emails

 

Class 35

 

The wording “direct marketing” in the identification of services is indefinite and must be clarified because the nature of the services is not clear. Any suggestion would be encompassed by “direct marketing services.” Therefore, the ambiguous language should be struck from the identification of services.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01. 

 

 

Applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate (suggestion are bold):

 

            Class 35: Direct advertising by e-mail; direct marketing services; direct marketing

 

Class 42

 

The wording “Development of software solutions for Internet providers and Internet users” in the identification of services is indefinite and must be clarified because the nature of the services is not clear.

 

 

Applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate (suggestion are bold):

 

            Class 42: Development of software solutions for Internet providers and Internet users; software as a service (SaaS) [SaaS] services featuring software for sending marketing emails

 

In a Trademark Act Section 66(a) application, classification of goods or services may not be changed from that assigned by the International Bureau of the World Intellectual Property Organization.  37 C.F.R. §2.85(d); TMEP §§1401.03(d), 1904.02(b).  Additionally, classes may not be added or goods or services transferred from one class to another in a multiple-class Section 66(a) application.  37 C.F.R. §2.85(d); TMEP §1401.03(d). 

 

Applicant’s goods or services 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 services or add goods or services 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 or services 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 or services will further limit scope, and once goods or services 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 and services 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

 

Any party who presents a document to the USPTO is subject to 37 C.F.R. §11.18(b).  Lewis Silkin LLP v. Firebrand LLC, 129 USPQ2d 1015, 1020 n.8 (TTAB 2018).  Thus, an attorney, applicant, or other party who signs or submits a document in connection with a trademark application is certifying that:

 

(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).

 

RESPONSE GUIDELINES

 

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

 

  • Missing the response deadline to this letter will cause the application to abandon.  A response or notice of appeal must be received by the USPTO before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  TEAS and ESTTA maintenance or unforeseen circumstances could affect an applicant’s ability to timely respond.  

 

 

 

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]


uspto.report is an independent third-party trademark research tool that is not affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or any other governmental organization. The information provided by uspto.report is based on publicly available data at the time of writing and is intended for informational purposes only.

While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information displayed on this site. The use of this site is at your own risk. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

All official trademark data, including owner information, should be verified by visiting the official USPTO website at www.uspto.gov. This site is not intended to replace professional legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for consulting with a legal professional who is knowledgeable about trademark law.

© 2024 USPTO.report | Privacy Policy | Resources | RSS Feed of Trademarks | Trademark Filings Twitter Feed