United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
|
U.S. Application Serial No. 79297430
Mark: SAPHIRA
|
|
|
Correspondence Address: |
|
|
Applicant: KARL STORZ SE & Co. KG
|
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N/A
Correspondence Email Address: |
|
NONFINAL OFFICE ACTION
International Registration No. 1558962
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).
· Potential Refusal under Trademark Act Section 2(d)
PARTIAL SECTION 2(d) REFUSAL – LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION
Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq. See the attached registrations.
Although not all du Pont factors may be relevant, there are generally two key considerations in any likelihood of confusion analysis: (1) the similarities between the compared marks and (2) the relatedness of the compared goods and/or services. See In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d at 1322, 123 USPQ2d at 1747 (quoting Herbko Int’l, Inc. v. Kappa Books, Inc., 308 F.3d 1156, 1164-65, 64 USPQ2d 1375, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2002)); Federated Foods, Inc. v. Fort Howard Paper Co.,544 F.2d 1098, 1103, 192 USPQ 24, 29 (C.C.P.A. 1976) (“The fundamental inquiry mandated by [Section] 2(d) goes to the cumulative effect of differences in the essential characteristics of the goods [or services] and differences in the marks.”); TMEP §1207.01.
Comparison of the Marks in General
Marks are compared in their entireties for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression. Stone Lion Capital Partners, LP v. Lion Capital LLP, 746 F.3d 1317, 1321, 110 USPQ2d 1157, 1160 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (quoting Palm Bay Imps., Inc. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee En 1772, 396 F.3d 1369, 1371, 73 USPQ2d 1689, 1691 (Fed. Cir. 2005)); TMEP §1207.01(b)-(b)(v). “Similarity in any one of these elements may be sufficient to find the marks confusingly similar.” In re Inn at St. John’s, LLC, 126 USPQ2d 1742, 1746 (TTAB 2018) (citing In re Davia, 110 USPQ2d 1810, 1812 (TTAB 2014)), aff’d per curiam, 777 F. App’x 516, 2019 BL 343921 (Fed. Cir. 2019); TMEP §1207.01(b).
Comparison of the Goods/Services in General
Analysis of the Marks
Applicant’s mark, SAPHIRA, is confusingly similar to the registered marks, SAPHIRA and SAPPHIRA, in sound, appearance, meaning or connotation and overall commercial impression.
With respect to the first mark, the marks are identical in appearance, sound, and meaning, “and have the potential to be used . . . in exactly the same manner.” In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 116 USPQ2d 1406, 1411 (TTAB 2015), aff’d, 866 F.3d 1315, 123 USPQ2d 1744 (Fed. Cir. 2017). Additionally, because they are identical, these marks are likely to engender the same connotation and overall commercial impression when considered in connection with applicant’s and registrant’s respective goods/services. Id. Therefore, the marks are confusingly similar.
With respect to the second mark, the marks are essentially phonetic equivalents and thus sound similar. Similarity in sound alone may be sufficient to support a finding that the compared marks are confusingly similar. In re 1st USA Realty Prof’ls, Inc., 84 USPQ2d 1581, 1586 (TTAB 2007) (citing Krim-Ko Corp. v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 390 F.2d 728, 732, 156 USPQ 523, 526 (C.C.P.A. 1968)); TMEP §1207.01(b)(iv). Applicant has merely deleted the extra letter “P” from this registrant’s mark but the overall commercial impression and sound is the same.
When comparing marks, “[t]he proper test is not a side-by-side comparison of the marks, but instead whether the marks are sufficiently similar in terms of their commercial impression such that [consumers] who encounter the marks would be likely to assume a connection between the parties.” Cai v. Diamond Hong, Inc., 901 F.3d 1367, 1373, 127 USPQ2d 1797, 1801 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (quoting Coach Servs., Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356, 1368, 101 USPQ2d 1713, 1721 (Fed. Cir. 2012)); TMEP §1207.01(b). The proper focus is on the recollection of the average purchaser, who retains a general rather than specific impression of trademarks. In re Inn at St. John’s, LLC, 126 USPQ2d 1742, 1746 (TTAB 2018) (citing In re St. Helena Hosp., 774 F.3d 747, 750-51, 113 USPQ2d 1082, 1085 (Fed. Cir. 2014); Geigy Chem. Corp. v. Atlas Chem. Indus., Inc., 438 F.2d 1005, 1007, 169 USPQ 39, 40 (C.C.P.A. 1971)), aff’d per curiam, 777 F. App’x 516, 2019 BL 343921 (Fed. Cir. 2019); TMEP §1207.01(b).
In this case, a consumer encountering the mark SAPHIRA in connection with applicant’s goods will incorrectly believe that the goods originate from the same source as each registrant’s SAPHIRA and SAPHIRA goods/services.
Where the marks of the respective parties are identical or virtually identical, as in this case, the degree of similarity or relatedness between the goods and/or services needed to support a finding of likelihood of confusion declines. See In re Country Oven, Inc., 2019 USPQ2d 443903, at *5 (TTAB 2019) (citing In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 116 USPQ2d 1406, 1411 (TTAB 2015), aff’d, 866 F.3d 1315, 123 USPQ2d 1744 (Fed. Cir. 2017)); TMEP §1207.01(a); see also In re Shell Oil Co., 992 F.2d 1204, 1207, 26 USPQ2d 1687, 1689 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Analysis of the Goods/Services
Applicant’s goods include:
Class 009: “devices for recording, transmitting and reproducing data, sound and images, in particular image analysis devices, image recording devices; image acquisition and development devices; image files for downloading, image transmission devices; image reproduction devices, namely video cameras; navigation, orientation, location tracking, target tracking and mapping devices; magnetic recording media; CDs, DVDs and other digital recording media; computer software; computer programs for image processing; computer hardware; documentation equipment for data processing; hardware for data processing; data transmission equipment; downloadable mobile applications for data transmission; digital camera; cameras with a linear image sensor; camera head; pan heads for cameras; endoscopes and endoscopic apparatus, other than for medical purposes; industrial endoscopes, not for medical purposes; parts and accessories for all the aforesaid goods, included in this class”
Class 010: “Surgical, medical, dental and veterinary instruments and apparatus, excluding head loupes and parts thereof, magnifying glasses and parts thereof; diagnostic apparatus for medical purposes, excluding head loupes and parts thereof, magnifying glasses and parts thereof; diagnostic imaging apparatus for nuclear medicine; medical imaging apparatus; multispectral fluorescence imaging devices [MFIS] for medical purposes; endoscopes; electronic endoscopes for medical purposes; flexible endoscopes for medical purposes; rigid endoscopes; light sources for medical purposes, excluding head loupes and parts thereof, magnifying glasses and parts thereof; light sources for electronic endoscopes for medical purposes; endoscopic equipment for medical and surgical purposes; medical apparatus and instruments, excluding head loupes and parts thereof, magnifying glasses and parts thereof; apparatus for endoscopy; surgical sutures; orthopaedic articles; orthopaedic aids; mobility aids; prostheses and artificial implants”
Registrant’s goods/services are recited above.
To the extent that both of the parties provide software and medical products and related goods, the goods/services are closely related if not identical.
In this case, the application uses broad wording to describe its software and medical goods, which presumably encompasses all goods of the type described, including registrant’s more narrow software and medical goods. See, e.g., In re Solid State Design Inc., 125 USPQ2d 1409, 1412-15 (TTAB 2018); Sw. Mgmt., Inc. v. Ocinomled, Ltd., 115 USPQ2d 1007, 1025 (TTAB 2015). For example, applicant’s software could be in any field, including registrant’s data transfer and processing; furthermore, applicant’s hardware could be used in connection with registrant’s software and serve the same purpose. Thus, applicant’s and registrant’s goods are legally identical. See, e.g., In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 127 USPQ2d 1627, 1629 (TTAB 2018) (citing Tuxedo Monopoly, Inc. v. Gen. Mills Fun Grp., Inc., 648 F.2d 1335, 1336, 209 USPQ 986, 988 (C.C.P.A. 1981); Inter IKEA Sys. B.V. v. Akea, LLC, 110 USPQ2d 1734, 1745 (TTAB 2014); Baseball Am. Inc. v. Powerplay Sports Ltd., 71 USPQ2d 1844, 1847 n.9 (TTAB 2004)).
Conversely, registrant’s “medical services” are broad enough to be in any medical field including those for which applicant’s medical goods are intended. Thus, these goods/services are closely related.
Additionally, the goods and/or services of the parties have no restrictions as to nature, type, channels of trade, or classes of purchasers and are “presumed to travel in the same channels of trade to the same class of purchasers.” In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Packard Press, Inc., 281 F.3d 1261, 1268, 62 USPQ2d 1001, 1005 (Fed. Cir. 2002)). Thus, applicant’s and registrant’s goods and/or services are related.
Summary of Analysis
A consumer encountering the mark SAPHIRA in connection with applicant’s software and related products and medical goods will incorrectly believe that the goods originate from the same source as each registrant’s SAPHIRA and SAPHIRA software and medical goods/services. As a result, because of the confusingly similar marks and closely related and potentially identical goods/services, registration is refused under Trademark Act Section 2(d).
Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration. However, if applicant responds to the refusal, applicant must also respond to the requirement(s) set forth below.
ADVISORY
The stated refusal refers to the following goods and does not bar registration for the other goods:
Class 009: “devices for recording, transmitting and reproducing data, sound and images, in particular image analysis devices, image recording devices; image acquisition and development devices; image files for downloading, image transmission devices; image reproduction devices, namely video cameras; navigation, orientation, location tracking, target tracking and mapping devices; magnetic recording media; CDs, DVDs and other digital recording media; computer software; computer programs for image processing; computer hardware; documentation equipment for data processing; hardware for data processing; data transmission equipment; downloadable mobile applications for data transmission; digital camera; cameras with a linear image sensor; camera head; pan heads for cameras; endoscopes and endoscopic apparatus, other than for medical purposes; industrial endoscopes, not for medical purposes; parts and accessories for all the aforesaid goods, included in this class”
Class 010: “Surgical, medical, dental and veterinary instruments and apparatus, excluding head loupes and parts thereof, magnifying glasses and parts thereof; diagnostic apparatus for medical purposes, excluding head loupes and parts thereof, magnifying glasses and parts thereof; diagnostic imaging apparatus for nuclear medicine; medical imaging apparatus; multispectral fluorescence imaging devices [MFIS] for medical purposes; endoscopes; electronic endoscopes for medical purposes; flexible endoscopes for medical purposes; rigid endoscopes; light sources for medical purposes, excluding head loupes and parts thereof, magnifying glasses and parts thereof; light sources for electronic endoscopes for medical purposes; endoscopic equipment for medical and surgical purposes; medical apparatus and instruments, excluding head loupes and parts thereof, magnifying glasses and parts thereof; apparatus for endoscopy; surgical sutures; orthopaedic articles; orthopaedic aids; mobility aids; prostheses and artificial implants”
(1) Deleting the goods to which the refusal pertains; or
(2) Filing a Request to Divide Application form (form #3) to divide out the goods that have not been refused registration, so that the mark may proceed toward publication for opposition for those goods to which the refusal does not pertain. See 37 C.F.R. §2.87. See generally TMEP §§1110 et seq. (regarding the requirements for filing a request to divide). If applicant files a request to divide, then to avoid abandonment, applicant must also file a timely response to all outstanding issues in this Office action, including the refusal. 37 C.F.R. §2.87(e).
The filing date of pending U.S. Application Serial No. 79281159 precedes applicant’s filing date. See attached referenced application. If the mark in the referenced application registers, applicant’s mark may be refused registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d) because of a likelihood of confusion between the two marks. See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); 37 C.F.R. §2.83; TMEP §§1208 et seq. Therefore, upon receipt of applicant’s response to this Office action, action on this application may be suspended pending final disposition of the earlier-filed referenced application.
In response to this Office action, applicant may present arguments in support of registration by addressing the issue of the potential conflict between applicant’s mark and the mark in the referenced application. Applicant’s election not to submit arguments at this time in no way limits applicant’s right to address this issue later if a refusal under Section 2(d) issues.
IDENTIFICATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF GOODS
The identification of goods must be clarified because some of the wording is indefinite and could include goods in more than one International Class or is otherwise unacceptable. See TMEP §1402.01.
The suggested identification below contains further guidance in bold. Applicant may adopt any or all of the suggestions in bold so long as they are accurate. If applicant does not adopt a suggestion, then applicant must amend the identification so that it is as specific as the suggestions and language found in the U.S. Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual.
Advisory on Wording and Punctuation
In the identification of goods, applicant must use the common commercial or generic names for the goods, be as complete and specific as possible, and avoid the use of indefinite words and phrases. TMEP §1402.03(a); see 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6). If applicant uses indefinite words such as “accessories,” “apparatus,” “components,” “devices,” “equipment,” “materials,” “parts,” “systems,” or “products,” such wording must be followed by “namely,” and a list of each specific product identified by its common commercial or generic name. See TMEP §§1401.05(d), 1402.03(a).
The identification for “imaging systems” in Class 009 is indefinite and too broad and must be clarified because the wording does not make clear the nature of the specific systems and could identify goods in more than one international class. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1401.05(d). Applicant must clarify the goods by (1) describing the nature, purpose, or use of the system, and (2) listing the system’s parts or components, using common generic terms and referencing the primary parts or components of the system first. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1401.05(d), 1402.01, 1402.03(a). Although systems may be classified in several international classes, any modification to the identification must identify goods in Class 009 only, the class specified in the application for such goods. See TMEP §1904.02(c)(ii).
An identification should set forth the common name of a good or service using terminology that is generally understood. Wording such as "included in this class" is not the common name of particular goods or services and would not be understood by those unfamiliar with the Nice Classification. If an identification includes wording such as "included in this class," "belonging in this class," or "excluding goods/services in other classes," or the like, the examining attorney will require the applicant to delete such wording because it does not identify a particular good or service. See TMEP §1402.01.
The identification 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 that have been deleted from registrations or in an affidavit of incontestability to indicate goods not claimed. See TMEP §1402.12. Therefore, applicant must remove the brackets from the identification and incorporate any bracketed information into the identification.
In general, commas should be used in an identification (1) to separate a series of related items identified within a particular category, (2) before and after “namely,” and (3) between each item in a list following “namely” (e.g., clothing, namely, shirts, pants, dresses). Id. Semicolons generally should be used to separate a series of distinct categories within an international class (e.g., clothing, namely, shirts, pants, dresses; footwear; headwear). Id.
Applicant may adopt the following identification, if accurate:
Class 9: Apparatus and instruments, namely, {indicate specific Class 9 apparatus and instruments} for scientific research in laboratories; teaching apparatus and simulators, namely, {indicate specific Class 9 apparatus and simulators}; optical apparatus and equipment, namely, {indicate specific Class 9 apparatus and equipment}; amplification apparatus and corrections, namely, {indicate specific Class 9 apparatus and corrections}; apparatus and instruments for conducting, switching, converting, storing, regulating and controlling electricity; devices for recording, transmitting and reproducing data, sound and images, in particular image analysis devices, image recording devices; image acquisition and development devices, namely, {indicate specific Class 9 devices}; multispectral fluorescence imaging systems [MFIS] comprised of {specify Class 9 components, e.g., microscopes and digital cameras} for scientific purposes; downloadable image files containing {indicate content or subject matter}; image transmission devices; image reproduction devices, namely video cameras; navigation, orientation, location tracking, target tracking and mapping devices, namely, {indicate specific Class 9 devices}; magnetic recording media in the nature of {specify, e.g., blank magnetic discs}; CDs, DVDs and other digital recording media, namely, {specify media} all being {specify if “blank” or “prerecorded in the field of __”}; magnets, magnetization and demagnetization devices; {specify downloadable or recorded} computer software for {specify the function of software, e.g., managing bank accounts, editing photos, making restaurant reservations}; computers; {specify downloadable or recorded} computer programs for image processing; computer hardware; documentation equipment, namely, {indicate specific Class 9 equipment} for data processing; laptops; laptop computers; laptop bags; {specify type, e.g., computer} hardware for data processing; data transmission equipment; downloadable mobile applications for data transmission; digital camera; cameras with a linear image sensor; camera head, namely, {clarify, e.g., tilting heads}; pan heads, namely, {clarify, e.g., tilting heads} for cameras; endoscopes and endoscopic apparatus, other than for medical purposes; industrial endoscopes, not for medical purposes; [delete or clarify “parts and accessories for all the aforesaid goods” that is for all of the goods but note that software does not have any parts or accessories]
Class 10: Surgical, medical, dental and veterinary instruments and apparatus, namely, {indicate specific Class 10 apparatus and instruments that applies to all those fields} excluding head loupes and parts thereof and excluding magnifying glasses and parts thereof; diagnostic apparatus for medical purposes for testing {specify condition or subject matter tested, e.g., blood sugar levels, cancer cells, DNA}, excluding head loupes and parts thereof and excluding magnifying glasses and parts thereof; diagnostic imaging apparatus for nuclear medicine; medical imaging apparatus; multispectral fluorescence imaging devices [MFIS] for {indicate, e.g., eyes, brain} for medical purposes; medical endoscopes; electronic endoscopes for medical purposes; flexible endoscopes for medical purposes; rigid medical endoscopes; light sources for medical purposes, namely, {indicate specific Class 10 light source}, excluding head loupes and parts thereof and excluding magnifying glasses and parts thereof; light sources, namely, {indicate specific Class 10 light source} for electronic endoscopes for medical purposes; endoscopic equipment for medical and surgical purposes; medical apparatus and instruments, namely, {indicate specific Class 10 apparatus and instruments}, excluding head loupes and parts thereof and excluding magnifying glasses and parts thereof; apparatus for endoscopy, namely, {indicate specific Class 10 apparatus, e.g., medical endoscope}; surgical sutures; orthopaedic articles, namely, {indicate specific Class 10 articles}; orthopaedic aids, namely, {indicate specific Class 10 aids}; mobility aids, namely, {indicate specific Class 10 aids}; prostheses and artificial implants for {specify type, e.g., breast, hand}
Class 16: Paper and paperboard, namely, file covers, binders, albums for {indicate type, e.g., coins, photographs, stamps}, display cards as stationery, almanacs; printed matter, namely, {indicate type of printed matter, e.g., books, paper signs, magazines} in the field of {indicate subject matter}; brochures in the field of {indicate subject matter}; leaflets in the field of {indicate subject matter}; bookbinding material; photographs; stationery; paper and stationery articles; instructional and teaching material, namely, {indicate specific Class 16 material} except apparatus; plastic materials for packaging, namely, {indicate specific Class 16 material, e.g., plastic film for use as wrapping and packaging material for medical equipment}; plastic bags for packaging; bags, pouches and goods for packing, wrapping and filing of paper, paperboard or plastics, namely, {indicate specific Class 16 bags, pouches and goods}; cardboard packaging material
ADVISORY ON CLASS: The classification of goods may not be changed from that assigned by the International Bureau. 37 C.F.R. §2.85(d); TMEP §§1401.03(d), 1904.02(b). Further, in a multiple-class Section 66(a) application, classes may not be added or goods transferred from one existing class to another. 37 C.F.R. §2.85(d); TMEP §1401.03(d).
The USPTO’s rules and policies with respect to identifications of goods are updated periodically to reflect changes in the marketplace and technology as well as changes to the international classification system. See TMEP §1402.14. For guidance on drafting acceptable identifications of goods, use the USPTO’s online U.S. Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual (ID Manual), which is continually updated in accordance with prevailing rules and policies. See TMEP §1402.04.
INFORMATION REQUIREMENT
To permit proper examination of the application, applicant must provide the following information:
(1) Explain whether the wording “SAPHIRA” in the mark has any meaning or significance in the industry in which the goods are manufactured, any meaning or significance as applied to applicant’s goods, or if such wording is a term of art within applicant’s industry.
(2) Explain whether this wording identifies a geographic place or has any meaning in a foreign language.
See 37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(9)-(a)(10), 2.61(b); TMEP §§809-809.03, 814.
Failure to comply with a request for information is grounds for refusing registration. In re Harley, 119 USPQ2d 1755, 1757-58 (TTAB 2016); TMEP §814.
EMAIL AND U.S. ATTORNEY 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.
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).
How to respond. Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action.
/Ms. Tasneem Hussain/
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 130
tasneem.hussain@uspto.gov (preferred)
571.272.8273
RESPONSE GUIDANCE