To: | Na, Jongju (kfreeman7120@gmail.com) |
Subject: | U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 85845540 - SCARLET - N/A |
Sent: | 7/11/2013 5:27:49 PM |
Sent As: | ECOM115@USPTO.GOV |
Attachments: |
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 85845540
MARK: SCARLET
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: |
GENERAL TRADEMARK INFORMATION: http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/index.jsp
|
APPLICANT: Na, Jongju
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS: |
|
SUSPENSION NOTICE: NO RESPONSE NEEDED
ISSUE/MAILING DATE: 7/11/2013
Upon further review of the application, the trademark examining attorney is suspending action on the application for the reason(s) stated below. See 37 C.F.R. §2.67; TMEP §§716 et seq.
The USPTO will periodically conduct a status check of the application to determine whether suspension remains appropriate, and the trademark examining attorney will issue as needed an inquiry letter to applicant regarding the status of the matter on which suspension is based. TMEP §§716.04, 716.05. Applicant will be notified when suspension is no longer appropriate. See TMEP §716.04.
No response to this notice is necessary; however, if applicant wants to respond, applicant should use the “Response to Suspension Inquiry or Letter of Suspension” form online at http://teasroa.gov.uspto.report/rsi/rsi.
PRIOR-FILED PENDING APPLICATION(S) FOUND: The trademark examining attorney has searched the USPTO’s database of registered and pending marks and has found no similar registered marks that would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d). TMEP §704.02; see 15 U.S.C. §1052(d). However, a mark(s) in a prior-filed pending application(s) may present a bar to registration of applicant’s mark.
The effective filing date of the pending application(s) identified below precedes the filing date of applicant’s application. If the mark in the referenced application(s) registers, applicant’s mark may be refused registration under Section 2(d) because of a likelihood of confusion with that registered mark(s). See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); 37 C.F.R. §2.83; TMEP §§1208 et seq. Therefore, action on this application is suspended until the earlier-filed referenced application(s) is either registered or abandoned. 37 C.F.R. §2.83(c). A copy of information relevant to this referenced application(s) is attached.
- Application Serial No(s). 79129196
Application with Earlier Effective Filing Date
Please note, prior pending application Serial No. 79129196, which would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d), has an earlier effective filing date than this application. This application has a filing date of February 9, 2013. The prior pending application has an effective filing date of November 30, 2012. This prior pending application is entitled to priority based on a foreign application, and therefore, the effective filing date is the date on which the foreign application was first filed in the foreign country. 15 U.S.C. §§1126(d)(1) and 1141g; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(4)(i) and 7.27(c); TMEP §§1003.02 and 1904.01(e).
Likelihood of Confusion Advisory
Trademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration of an applied-for mark that so resembles a registered mark that it is likely a potential consumer would be confused, mistaken, or deceived as to the source of the goods of the applicant and registrant. See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d). A determination of likelihood of confusion under Section 2(d) is made on a case-by case basis and the factors set forth in In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973) aid in this determination. Citigroup Inc. v. Capital City Bank Grp., Inc., 637 F.3d 1344, 1349, 98 USPQ2d 1253, 1256 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (citing On-Line Careline, Inc. v. Am. Online, Inc., 229 F.3d 1080, 1085, 56 USPQ2d 1471, 1474 (Fed. Cir. 2000)).
In this case, the following factors are the most relevant: similarity of the marks, similarity and nature of the goods, and similarity of the trade channels of the goods. 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.
Both applicant’s and the prior pending marks are identical (SCARLET). Furthermore, the identification of goods indicates that both applicant’s and the prior pending marks are for goods used in spinal surgery. Applicant’s goods are medical instruments used in surgery and the prior pending application is for spinal implants. Because the applied-for marks are identical and the goods are used by the same consumers (spinal surgeons), the marks are considered related for the purposes of a Section 2(d) refusal based on a likelihood of confusion. Therefore, because of a potential likelihood of confusion, action is suspended pending Application Serial No. 79129196.
Zachary R. Sparer
/Zachary R. Sparer/
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 115
571-272-9168
zachary.sparer@uspto.gov
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 the Trademark Status and Document Retrieval (TSDR) system at http://tsdr.gov.uspto.report/. Please keep a copy of the TSDR status screen. If the status shows no change for more than six months, contact the Trademark Assistance Center by e-mail at TrademarkAssistanceCenter@uspto.gov or 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 Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/correspondence.jsp.