To: | E.G. Hill Company, Inc. (usptomail@whitelawfirm.com) |
Subject: | U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 86135759 - ALERT - N/A - Request for Reconsideration Denied - No Appeal Filed |
Sent: | 1/8/2015 6:16:31 PM |
Sent As: | ECOM105@USPTO.GOV |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 |
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 86135759
MARK: ALERT
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: |
GENERAL TRADEMARK INFORMATION: http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/index.jsp
|
APPLICANT: E.G. Hill Company, Inc.
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS: |
|
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED
ISSUE/MAILING DATE: 1/8/2015
Applicant’s request for reconsideration has been reviewed and is denied for the reasons stated below. See 37 C.F.R. §2.64(b); TMEP §§715.03(a)(2)(B), (a)(2)(E), 715.04(a). The Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, and 45 refusal made final in the Office action dated October 14, 2014 is maintained and continued. See TMEP §§715.03(a)(2)(B), (a)(2)(E), 715.04(a).
Registration has been refused because the applied-for mark ALERT is used a varietal and cultivar name for live plants and flowers and as such, does not function as a trademark to indicate the source of applicant’s goods and to identify and distinguish them from others. Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051-1052, 1127; see TMEP §1202.12.
Applicant’s request for reconsideration does not raise a new issue or provide any new or compelling evidence with regard to the outstanding refusal. Further, applicant’s analysis and arguments are not persuasive and do not overcome the refusal. The evidence attached to the initial Office action dated March 24, 2014 from the reliable agriculture-related sources of the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants and the United States Department of Agriculture state that ALERT is the varietal name for an assortment of plants and flowers, including chrysanthemums, cucumber, potato, carrots, lettuce, wheat, ryegrass and tomato. See also the attached evidence from the Germplasm Resources Information Network stating that ALERT is a cultivar name for a variety of beans. Applicant's broad identification of goods encompasses all types of plants and flowers, including those for which ALERT is used as a varietal and cultivar name.
Accordingly, the request is denied.
Response Option – Amend the Identification of Goods
As noted in the previous Office action, applicant has the option to respond by amending the identification of goods to identify specific types of live plants or flowers for which ALERT is not used as a varietal or cultivar name. For example, applicant could narrow the identification of goods to just “roses” in International Class 31.
For assistance with identifying and classifying the goods, please see the USPTO’s online searchable U.S. Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual at http://tess2.gov.uspto.report/netahtml/tidm.html. See TMEP §1402.04.
RESPONSE GUIDELINES:
The filing of a request for reconsideration does not extend the time for filing a proper response to a final Office action or an appeal with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, which runs from the date the final Office action was issued/mailed. See 37 C.F.R. §2.64(b); TMEP §715.03, (a)(2)(B), (a)(2)(E), (c).
Applicant has the remainder of the six-month response period to the final Office action to comply with and/or overcome the outstanding final refusal and/or to file an appeal with the Board. TMEP §715.03(a)(2)(B), (c). A response to this action can be filed online via the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), using the “Request for Reconsideration after Final Office Action Form” available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp. For technical assistance with the online response form, e-mail TEAS@uspto.gov.
/Kristin Carlson/
Trademark Examiner: LO 105
800-786-9199 (trademark helpline)
571-272-2240 (direct dial)
kristin.carlson@uspto.gov