UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)

OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION

 

 

 

OFFICE ACTION

 

STRICT DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER

TO AVOID ABANDONMENT OF APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION, THE USPTO MUST RECEIVE APPLICANT’S COMPLETE RESPONSE TO THIS LETTER WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF THE ISSUE/MAILING DATE BELOW.

 

ISSUE/MAILING DATE: 7/1/2012

 

First  Action

 

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 that applicant must address:

 

• Refusal of Registration – Likelihood of Confusion under Section 2(d)
• Requirement for Specimens that Match Drawing

 

REFUSAL OF REGISTRATION:  LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION—Section 2(d)

 

Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the mark in U.S. Registration No. 3518959.  Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the enclosed registration.

 

Reg. No. 3518959 is VENTAMATIC (standard character) for “power ventilators to exhaust hot air from attics; static ventilators to exhaust hot air from attics; high-velocity electric floor fans”

 

Trademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration of an applied-for mark that so resembles a registered mark that it is likely that a potential consumer would be confused, mistaken, or deceived as to the source of the goods and/or services of the applicant and registrant.  See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).  In the seminal decision In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973), the court listed the principal factors to be considered when determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion under Section 2(d).  See TMEP §1207.01.  However, not all the factors are necessarily relevant or of equal weight, and any one of the factors may control in a given case, depending upon the evidence of record.  Citigroup Inc. v. Capital City Bank Grp., Inc., 637 F.3d 1344, 1355, 98 USPQ2d 1253, 1260 (Fed. Cir. 2011); In re Majestic Distilling Co., 315 F.3d 1311, 1315, 65 USPQ2d 1201, 1204 (Fed. Cir. 2003); see In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d at 1361-62, 177 USPQ at 567.

 

In this case, the following factors are the most relevant:  similarity of the marks, similarity and nature of the goods and/or services, and similarity of the trade channels of the goods and/or services.  See In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1361-62, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Dakin’s Miniatures Inc., 59 USPQ2d 1593, 1595-96 (TTAB 1999); TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.

 

A.                Similarity of the Marks

 

Marks are compared in their entireties for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression.  In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 1361, 177 USPQ 563, 567 (C.C.P.A. 1973)); TMEP §1207.01(b)-(b)(v).  Similarity in any one of these elements may be sufficient to find the marks confusingly similar.  In re White Swan Ltd., 8 USPQ2d 1534, 1535 (TTAB 1988); see In re 1st USA Realty Prof’ls, Inc., 84 USPQ2d 1581, 1586 (TTAB 2007); TMEP §1207.01(b).

 

The applicant’s mark is VENTMATIC which is comprised of two syllables, namely, VENT and MATIC.  The registrant’s mark is VENTAMATIC which is comprised of three syllables, namely, VENT, A, and MATIC.  The first and last syllables of the marks are identical in spelling, meaning, and pronunciation.  The applicant has merely deleted the vowel “A” from the registrant’s mark.  Slight differences in the sound of similar marks will not avoid a likelihood of confusion.  In re Energy Telecomm. & Elec. Ass’n, 222 USPQ 350, 351 (TTAB 1983); see In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1367, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1912 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

 

Further, the marks convey the same meaning.  Each mark uses VENT as the first syllable because the goods are ventilation equipment.  The last syllable MATIC suggests that the goods are mechanized.  In sum, given the highly similar appearance and connotation of the two marks, it follows that the marks create a highly similar commercial impression.

 

B.                 Similarity of the Goods

 

If the marks of the respective parties are identical or highly similar, the examining attorney must consider the commercial relationship between the goods or services of the respective parties carefully to determine whether there is a likelihood of confusion.  In re Concordia International Forwarding Corp., 222 USPQ 355 (TTAB 1983).  TMEP §1207.01(a). 

 

The applicant’s goods are exhaust hoods for kitchens.  The registrant’s goods are ventilators to exhaust hot air and electric floor fans.  The attached third party registrations and Internet excerpts from www.broan.com, www.greenheck.com, and www.airkinglimited.com show that kitchen exhaust hoods and attic fans/exhaust fans are frequently found under the same mark.  Consumers are accustomed to seeing goods such as the applicant and registrant’s under the same mark and consumers are likely to be believe that the applicant and registrant’s goods emanate from the same source. 

 

Thus, upon encountering VENTMATIC used on exhaust hoods for kitchens, and VENTAMATIC used on “power ventilators to exhaust hot air from attics; static ventilators to exhaust hot air from attics; high-velocity electric floor fans”, consumers are likely to be confused and mistakenly believe that the respective goods emanate from a common source. 

 

In total, the two marks create the same commercial impression and the evidence shows that the goods are commercially related and likely to be encountered together in the marketplace by consumers.   Therefore, consumers are likely to be confused and mistakenly believe that the products originate from a common source.  Therefore, registration must be refused under Section 2(d) of the Lanham Act .

 

RESPONSE

 

Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal(s) by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.

 

Applicant must respond to the requirement(s) set forth below.

 

Specimens and Drawing Do Not Match

 

The mark on the specimen disagrees with the mark on the drawing.  In this case, the specimen displays the mark as VENT-MATIC (two words with hyphen); and the drawing shows the mark as VENTMATIC (one word).

 

An application based on Trademark Act Section 1(a) must include a specimen showing the applied-for mark in use in commerce for each class of goods and/or services.  Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a).  The mark on the drawing must be a substantially exact representation of the mark on the specimen.  37 C.F.R. §2.51(a); TMEP §807.12(a); see 37 C.F.R. §2.72(a)(1).  In addition, the drawing of the mark can be amended only if the amendment does not materially alter the mark as originally filed.  37 C.F.R. §2.72(a)(2); see TMEP §§807.12(a), 807.14 et seq.

 

Therefore, applicant must submit one of the following:

 

(1)  A new drawing of the mark that agrees with the mark on the specimen but does not materially alter the original mark.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.72(a)(2); TMEP §§807.12(a), 807.14 et seq.  Amending the drawing to agree with the specimen would not be considered a material alteration of the mark in this case.

 

(2)  A substitute specimen showing use in commerce of the mark on the drawing, and 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.”  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.59(a), 2.193(e)(1); TMEP §§807.12(a), 904.05.  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); TMEP §904.05.

 

Pending receipt of a proper response, registration is refused because the specimen does not show the applied-for mark in use in commerce as a trademark and/or service mark.  Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a).

 

Further, the marks convey the same meaning.  Each mark suggests that the goods on which the marks are used are the choice or “selection” of automotive repair professionals and those who aspire to use professional grade products .

 

In sum, given the highly similar appearance and connotation of the two marks, it follows that the marks create a highly similar commercial impression.

 

Substitute Declaration

 

Applicant may respond to the stated specimen refusal by submitting a verified substitute specimen or amending the application to an intent to use filing basis under Trademark Act Section 1(b) by following the suggested directions below for responding either online or by mail. 

 

If applicant responds to this Office action online via the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), applicant should provide a substitute specimen as follows:  (1) answer “yes” to the TEAS response form wizard question to “submit a new or substitute specimen,” (2) attach a jpg or pdf file of the substitute specimen, and (3) select the statement that “The substitute specimen(s) was in use in commerce at least as early as the filing date of the application.”  However, if applicant is responding by amending the application to a Section 1(b) filing basis, applicant should do the following:  (1) answer “yes” to the TEAS response form wizard questions to “change filing basis” and for a “signed declaration,” respectively; (2) uncheck the box for “Filing Basis Section 1(a);” and (3) check the box for “Filing Basis Section 1(b).”  Please note that these steps appear on different pages of the TEAS response form. 

 

Whether submitting a substitute specimen or amending the filing basis to Section 1(b), applicant must also personally sign or personally enter his/her electronic signature and date after the declaration at the end of the TEAS response form, and print or type the name of the signatory immediately below or adjacent to his/her signature or identify it elsewhere in the filing.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(2), 2.59(a), 2.193(a), (c)-(d), (e)(1); TMEP §§611.01(c), 804.01(b). 

 

If applicant experiences difficulty in submitting the required substitute specimen, supporting statement and/or declaration, or changing the filing basis, please e-mail TEAS@uspto.gov for technical assistance regarding the TEAS response form.

 

If applicant responds to this Office action on paper, via regular mail, applicant may provide a verified substitute specimen by (1) checking the first statement below and personally signing, dating, and printing or typing the name of the signatory in the declaration appearing below the statement; and (2) submitting a substitute specimen showing the applied-for mark in use in commerce.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.20, 2.59(a), 2.193(a)(1), (d), (e)(1); TMEP §§611.01(b), 804.01(b), 904.05.  If applicant is responding by amending the application to a Section 1(b) filing basis, applicant may check the second statement below, and personally sign, date, and enter the printed or typed name of the signatory in the declaration appearing below the statement.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.20, 2.34(a)(2), 2.193(a)(1), (d), (e)(1); TMEP §§611.01(b), 804.01(b), 806.03(c).

 

q         The substitute specimen was in use in commerce at least as early as the filing date of the application.

 

q         Applicant has had a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce on or in connection with the goods and/or services listed in the application as of the filing date of the application.

 

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 therefrom, declares that 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)

 

 

 

/Kim Saito/

Trademark Examining Attorney LO102

kim.saito@uspto.gov

571.272.9214

 

TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER:  Go to http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp.  Please wait 48-72 hours from the issue/mailing date before using TEAS, to allow for necessary system updates of the application.  For technical assistance with online forms, e-mail TEAS@uspto.gov.  For questions about the Office action itself, please contact the assigned trademark examining attorney.  E-mail communications will not be accepted as responses to Office actions; therefore, do not respond to this Office action by e-mail.

 

All informal e-mail communications relevant to this application will be placed in the official application record.

 

WHO MUST SIGN THE RESPONSE:  It must be personally signed by an individual applicant or someone with legal authority to bind an applicant (i.e., a corporate officer, a general partner, all joint applicants).  If an applicant is represented by an attorney, the attorney must sign the response. 

 

PERIODICALLY CHECK THE STATUS OF THE APPLICATION:  To ensure that applicant does not miss crucial deadlines or official notices, check the status of the application every three to four months using Trademark Applications and Registrations Retrieval (TARR) at http://tarr.gov.uspto.report/.  Please keep a copy of the complete TARR screen.  If TARR shows no change for more than six months, call 1-800-786-9199.  For more information on checking status, see http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/process/status/.

 

TO UPDATE CORRESPONDENCE/E-MAIL ADDRESS:  Use the TEAS form at http://www.gov.uspto.report/teas/eTEASpageE.htm.

 

 

 

 

 

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING YOUR

U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION

 

USPTO OFFICE ACTION HAS ISSUED ON 7/1/2012 FOR

SERIAL NO. 85570230

 

Please follow the instructions below to continue the prosecution of your application:

 

 

TO READ OFFICE ACTION: Click on this link or go to http://portal.gov.uspto.report/external/portal/tow and enter the application serial number to access the Office action.

 

PLEASE NOTE: The Office action may not be immediately available but will be viewable within 24 hours of this e-mail notification.

 

RESPONSE IS REQUIRED: You should carefully review the Office action to determine (1) how to respond; and (2) the applicable response time period. Your response deadline will be calculated from 7/1/2012 (or sooner if specified in the office action).

 

Do NOT hit “Reply” to this e-mail notification, or otherwise attempt to e-mail your response, as the USPTO does NOT accept e-mailed responses.  Instead, the USPTO recommends that you respond online using the Trademark Electronic Application System Response Form.

 

HELP: For technical assistance in accessing the Office action, please e-mail

TDR@uspto.gov.  Please contact the assigned examining attorney with questions about the Office action. 

 

        WARNING

 

Failure to file the required response by the applicable deadline will result in the ABANDONMENT of your application.