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: 7/10/2014

 

The assigned trademark examining attorney has reviewed the referenced application and has determined the following:

 

Section 2(d) - Likelihood of Confusion Refusal

 

Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the marks in U.S. Registration Nos. 1603556, 3267870, 3382672, 4231343, 4471422, 4564607 and 4402395.  Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the enclosed registrations.

 

In any likelihood of confusion determination, two key considerations are similarity of the marks and similarity or relatedness of the goods and/or services.  See Federated Foods, Inc. v. Fort Howard Paper Co., 544 F.2d 1098, 1103, 192 USPQ 24, 29 (C.C.P.A. 1976); In re Iolo Techs., LLC, 95 USPQ2d 1498, 1499 (TTAB 2010); TMEP §1207.01; see also In re Dixie Rests. Inc., 105 F.3d 1405, 1406-07, 41 USPQ2d 1531, 1533 (Fed. Cir. 1997).  That is, the 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).  Additionally, the goods and/or services are compared to determine whether they are similar or commercially related or travel in the same trade channels.  See Coach Servs., Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356, 1369-71, 101 USPQ2d 1713, 1722-23 (Fed. Cir. 2012); Herbko Int’l, Inc. v. Kappa Books, Inc., 308 F.3d 1156, 1165, 64 USPQ2d 1375, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2002); TMEP §1207.01, (a)(vi).

 

The overriding concern is not only to prevent buyer confusion as to the source of the goods and/or services, but to protect the registrant from adverse commercial impact due to use of a similar mark by a newcomer.  See In re Shell Oil Co., 992 F.2d 1204, 1208, 26 USPQ2d 1687, 1690 (Fed. Cir. 1993).  Therefore, any doubt regarding a likelihood of confusion determination is resolved in favor of the registrant.  TMEP §1207.01(d)(i); see Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Packard Press, Inc., 281 F.3d 1261, 1265, 62 USPQ2d 1001, 1003 (Fed. Cir. 2002); In re Hyper Shoppes (Ohio), Inc., 837 F.2d 463, 464-65, 6 USPQ2d 1025, 1025 (Fed. Cir. 1988).

 

Comparison of the Marks

 

In a likelihood of confusion determination, the marks are compared for similarities in their appearance, sound, meaning or connotation and commercial impression.  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).  Similarity in any one of these elements may be sufficient to find a likelihood of confusion.  In re White Swan Ltd., 8 USPQ2d 1534, 1535 (TTAB 1988); In re Lamson Oil Co., 6 USPQ2d 1041, 1043 (TTAB 1987); see TMEP §1207.01(b).

 

In the instant case, the applicant’s mark “ASAP” is identical to the registrants’ marks for “ASAP” in Registration Numbers 1603556 and 3267870. Thus, the marks are identical in terms of appearance and sound. In addition, the connotation and commercial impression of the marks do not differ when considered in connection with applicant’s and registrant’s respective goods and/or services.

Therefore, the marks are confusingly similar.

The applicant’s mark “ASAP” highly similar to the registrants’ marks listed below.

 

Registration Number 3382672 for “MEETASAP”;

 

Registration Number 4231343 for “ASAP AUTOMATED SECURE ALARM PROTOCOL”;

 

Registration Number 4471422 for “A$AP ROCKY”; and

 

Registration Number 4564607 for “A$AP WORLDWIDE”.

 

The only difference between the marks is that the applicant deleted the wording “MEET”, “AUTOMATED SECURE ALARM PROTOCOL”, the “$” symbol replacing the letter “S” in the word “ASAP” and the wording “ROCKY” and “WORLDWIDE”.

 

The mere deletion of wording from a registered mark may not be sufficient to overcome a likelihood of confusion.  See In re Mighty Leaf Tea, 601 F.3d 1342, 94 USPQ2d 1257 (Fed. Cir. 2010); In re Optica Int’l, 196 USPQ 775, 778 (TTAB 1977); TMEP §1207.01(b)(ii)-(iii).  Applicant’s mark does not create a distinct commercial impression because it contains the same common wording as the registered mark, and there is no other wording to distinguish it from the registered mark.

 

Consumers are generally more inclined to focus on the first word, prefix, or syllable in any trademark or service mark.  See Palm Bay Imps., Inc. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee En 1772, 396 F. 3d 1369, 1372, 73 USPQ2d 1689, 1692 (Fed. Cir. 2005); Presto Prods., Inc. v. Nice-Pak Prods., Inc., 9 USPQ2d 1895, 1897 (TTAB 1988) (“it is often the first part of a mark which is most likely to be impressed upon the mind of a purchaser and remembered” when making purchasing decisions).  In the instant case, the abbreviation “ASAP” appears as the first word in five out of the six marks cited by the examining attorney. 

 

Comparison of the Goods/Services - In-part as to specific goods and services in International Classes 9, 38, 41 and 42

 

The goods and/or services of the parties need not be identical or directly competitive to find a likelihood of confusion.  See Safety-Kleen Corp. v. Dresser Indus., Inc., 518 F.2d 1399, 1404, 186 USPQ 476, 480 (C.C.P.A. 1975); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i).  Rather, it is sufficient to show that because of the conditions surrounding their marketing, or because they are otherwise related in some manner, the goods and/or services would be encountered by the same consumers under circumstances such that offering the goods and/or services under confusingly similar marks would lead to the mistaken belief that they come from, or are in some way associated with, the same source.  In re Iolo Techs., LLC, 95 USPQ2d 1498, 1499 (TTAB 2010); see In re Martin’s Famous Pastry Shoppe, Inc., 748 F.2d 1565, 1566-68, 223 USPQ 1289, 1290 (Fed. Cir. 1984); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i).

 

The applicant’s goods in International Class 9 for “Software tool and feature for downloading, uploading and streaming of multimedia content” and International Class 42 for “Computer services, namely providing non-downloadable software tool for steaming and delivery of multimedia” are closely related to the services in Registration Number 1603556 for “COMPUTER PROGRAMS AND ACCOMPANYING MANUALS SOLD AS A UNIT FOR USE AS AN ELECTRONIC MAIL SYSTEM” in International Class 9 and Registration Number 3382672 for “downloadable computer software for creating, enhancing, managing, sending and receiving data, messages, voice and telephony over computer networks and the Internet, and for use on or with personal computers, computer servers” in International Class 9.

 

With respect to applicant’s and registrant’s goods and/or services, the question of likelihood of confusion is determined based on the description of the goods and/or services stated in the application and registration at issue, not on extrinsic evidence of actual use.  See, e.g., Coach Servs., Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356, 1369-70, 101 USPQ2d 1713, 1722 (Fed. Cir. 2012); Octocom Sys. Inc. v. Hous. Computers Servs. Inc., 918 F.2d 937, 942, 16 USPQ2d 1783, 1787 (Fed. Cir. 1990). 

 

Absent restrictions in an application and/or registration, the identified goods and/or services 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)).  Additionally, unrestricted and broad identifications are presumed to encompass all goods and/or services of the type described.  See In re Jump Designs, LLC, 80 USPQ2d 1370, 1374 (TTAB 2006) (citing In re Elbaum, 211 USPQ 639, 640 (TTAB 1981)); In re Linkvest S.A., 24 USPQ2d 1716, 1716 (TTAB 1992). 

 

In this case, the identification set forth in the application and registration(s) has no restrictions as to nature, type, channels of trade, or classes of purchasers.  Therefore, it is presumed that these goods and/or services travel in all normal channels of trade, and are available to the same class of purchasers.  Further, the application use(s) broad wording to describe the goods and/or services and this wording is presumed to encompass all goods and/or services of the type described, including those in registrant(s) more narrow identification.  The applicant may resolve this issue by further specifying precisely what type of “multimedia content” is being referred to. Please see the applicant’s and registrants’ identification of goods and services as evidence.

 

The applicant’s services in International Class 38 for “providing an internet forum, online chat rooms and online communities for the transmission of messages among computer users concerning reviews, ratings and recommendations related to voice, audio, visual images, data, books, photos, videos, text, documents, content, audiovisual works, multimedia works, literary works, files, and other electronic; and “providing online chat rooms, internet forums and online communities for the transmission of photos, videos, text, and electronic works, namely, books, data, images, documents, content, visual works, audio works, audiovisual works, multimedia works, literary works, files, and other electronic works” are closely related to the services in Registration Number 3267870 for “providing on-line chat rooms and electronic bulletin boards for transmission of messages among users related to syringomyelia, chiari malformations and related conditions and disorders” in International Class 38 and Registration Number 4231343 for “Providing on-line forums in the field of central station alarm monitoring” in International Class 38.

 

In this case, the identification set forth in the application and registration(s) has no restrictions as to nature, type, channels of trade, or classes of purchasers.  Therefore, it is presumed that these goods and/or services travel in all normal channels of trade, and are available to the same class of purchasers.  Further, the application use(s) broad wording to describe the services and this wording is presumed to encompass all services of the type described, including those in registrant(s)’s more narrow identification.  Please see the applicant’s and registrants’ recitation of services as evidence.

 

The applicant’s services in International Class 41 for “Entertainment services, namely providing non-downloadable playback of multimedia content and audio and video recordings via global communications network” are closely related to the services in Registration Number 4471422 for “providing a website featuring musical performance video, musical multi-media materials, and information on a musical performer” in International Class 41 and Registration Number 4564607 for “Providing a website featuring musical performance videos, musical multi-media materials, and information on a musical performer” in International Class 41.

 

In this case, the identification set forth in the application and registration(s) has no restrictions as to nature, type, channels of trade, or classes of purchasers.  Therefore, it is presumed that these goods and/or services travel in all normal channels of trade, and are available to the same class of purchasers.  Further, the application use(s) broad wording to describe the services and this wording is presumed to encompass all services of the type described, including those in registrant(s) more narrow identification.  Please see the applicant’s and registrants’ recitation of services as evidence.

 

Purchasers of applicant’s goods and services could mistakenly assume such goods and services were offered/produced by registrant, or that applicant and registrant are related in some way.  Accordingly, since the marks are confusingly similar and the goods and services are closely related, there is a likelihood of confusion and registration must be refused under Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act.

 

Although the trademark examining attorney has refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal to register by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.  If applicant chooses to respond to the refusal to register, then applicant must also respond to the following requirements.

 

Application Informalities

 

Identification of Goods/Services

 

The identification of goods and services is unacceptable as indefinite because the goods/services listed were not specific enough and may be classified in several different International Classes. See TMEP §1402.01.

 

Class 9 

 

The wording “Software tool and feature…” in the identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified because this language is vague.  See TMEP §1402.01.  Applicant must amend the identification to specify the common commercial name of the goods.  If there is no common commercial name, applicant must describe the product and its intended uses.  See id.

 

Applicant may adopt the following identification of goods, if accurate: 

 

“Computer software and feature of computer software that enables enabling downloading, uploading and streaming of multimedia content in the nature of ____ {specify} and audio and video recordings; Computer software and feature of computer software for storage and playback of personalized multimedia content in the nature of ____ {specify} and audio and video recordings”;

 

Class 38

 

The wording “communication services for transmitting, storing, accessing, receiving, downloading, streaming, broadcasting, sharing, displaying, formatting, mirroring and transferring electronic data and multimedia content, namely voice, audio, visual images, data, books, photos, videos, text, documents, content, audiovisual works, multimedia works, literary works, files, and other electronic works, via telecommunications networks, wireless communication networks, the Internet, information services networks, and data networks;” in the identification of services is vague and too broad because it includes services in several different classes.  See TMEP §1402.01.  For example, electronic data transmission is classified in Class 38; storing of electronic data is classified in Class 39; remastering of films from one format to another is classified in Class 40. 

 

The wording “providing online communities for the transmission of messages among computer users concerning reviews, ratings and recommendations related to voice, audio, visual images, data, books, photos, videos, text, documents, content, audiovisual works, multimedia works, literary works, files, and other electronic works” does not appear to belong in International Class 38.

 

The wording “providing access to online directories, databases, current events websites and blogs, and on-line reference materials in the entertainment and literary fields” is vague and identifies services outside of International Class 38.  For example, “providing an online commercial information directory on the internet” is in International Class 35; “providing access to a database” is in International Class 38; and “providing current event news via a global computer network” is in International Class 41.

 

The wording “providing access to auxiliary devices or electronic devices in the nature of providing telecommunication connectivity services for the transfer of images, messages, audio, visual, audiovisual and multimedia works among e-readers, mobile phones, smartphones, portable electronic devices, portable digital devices, or computers” is confusing.  The wording “providing access…of providing telecommunications connectivity” in particular does not make clear what type of service the applicant intends.  The applicant must make clear whether it is renting out devices or providing telecommunications connections to devices.

 

The wording “providing online communities for the transmission of photos, videos, text, and electronic works, namely, books, data, images, documents, content, visual works, audio works, audiovisual works, multimedia works, literary works, files, and other electronic works” does not appear to be classified in International Class 38.

 

Applicant may adopt the following recitation of services, if accurate: 

 

“Electronic data transmission; electronic transmission and streaming of digital media content for others via global and local networks; wireless broadband communication services; providing an internet forum and online chat rooms for the transmission of messages among computer users concerning reviews, ratings and recommendations related to voice, audio, visual images, data, books, photos, videos, text, documents, content, audiovisual works, multimedia works, literary works, files, and other electronic works via telecommunications networks, wireless communication networks, the Internet and data networks; providing access to databases in the entertainment and literary fields; streaming of audio, visual and audiovisual material via the Internet or other computer or communications network; providing online chat rooms and internet forums for the transmission of photos, videos, text, and electronic works, namely, books, data, images, documents, content, visual works, audio works, audiovisual works, multimedia works, literary works, files, and other electronic works; {specify, e.g., telecommunication services} ____, namely, transmission of podcasts and webcasts”;

 

Class 39

 

The wording “storage of electronic data and digital multimedia content” is incorrectly classified in International Class 39 and is indefinite.  Said services are properly classified in International Class 42 and require further clarification.

 

The wording “distribution services, namely, delivery of electronic data and multimedia content” is confusing and requires clarification.  The applicant’s services appear to be properly classified in International Class 38.   Applicant may adopt the following recitation of services, if accurate:  “transmission and distribution of data and multimedia content in the nature of ____ {specify, e.g., audio visual images} via a global computer network” in International Class 38.

 

Class 41

 

The wording “multimedia content and audio and video recordings” in the identification of services is indefinite and must be clarified because the recitation, as written in the Id Manual, refers specifically to the playback of “music”.  See TMEP §1402.01.  Applicant must amend this wording to specify the common commercial or generic name for the services.  If there is no common commercial or generic name for the services, then applicant must describe the nature of the services as well as their main purpose, channels of trade, and the intended consumer(s). 

 

Applicant may adopt the following recitation of services, if accurate: 

 

“Entertainment services, namely providing non-downloadable playback of multimedia content in the nature of ____ {specify, e.g., music} and ____ {specify, e.g., other musical audio recordings} via global communications network”;

 

Class 42

 

The wording “providing non-downloadable software tool for” in the identification of services is indefinite and must be clarified because according to the Id Manual, these software tools are “development tools”.  See TMEP §1402.01.  Applicant must amend this wording to specify the common commercial or generic name for the services.  If there is no common commercial or generic name for the services, then applicant must describe the nature of the services as well as their main purpose, channels of trade, and the intended consumer(s). 

 

Applicant may adopt the following recitation of services, if accurate: 

 

“{Specify, e.g., Providing temporary use of on-line} ____ non-downloadable software ____ {specify, e.g., development} tools for streaming and delivery of multimedia in the nature of ____ {specify} and audio and video recordings; {Specify, e.g., Providing temporary use of on-line} ____ non-downloadable software ____ {specify, e.g., development} tools for use in storage and playback of personalized multimedia content in the nature of ____ {specify} and audio and video recordings;  creating an on-line community for ____ {specify user, e.g., registered users} for the purpose of ____ {indicate purpose, e.g., participating in political discussions}; storage of electronic data and digital multimedia content in the nature of ____ {specify, e.g., messages, images, etc.}”.

 

For assistance with identifying and classifying goods and/or services in trademark applications, please see the online searchable Manual of Acceptable Identifications of Goods and Services at http://tess2.gov.uspto.report/netahtml/tidm.html.

 

Please note that, while the identification of services may be amended to clarify or limit the services, adding to the services or broadening the scope of the services is not permitted.  37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06.  Therefore, applicant may not amend the identification to include services that are not within the scope of the services set forth in the present identification.

 

Multiple Class Requirements

 

The application identifies goods and/or services in more than one international class; therefore, applicant must satisfy all the requirements below for each international class based on Trademark Act Section 1(b):

 

(1)       List the goods and/or services by their international class number in consecutive numerical order, starting with the lowest numbered class.

 

(2)       Submit a filing fee for each international class not covered by the fee(s) already paid (view the USPTO’s current fee schedule at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/tm_fee_info.jsp).  The application identifies goods and/or services that are classified in at least seven classes; however, applicant submitted a fee(s) sufficient for only five class(es).  Applicant must either submit the filing fees for the classes not covered by the submitted fees or restrict the application to the number of classes covered by the fees already paid.

 

See 15 U.S.C. §§1051(b), 1112, 1126(e); 37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(6)-(7), 2.34(a)(2)-(3), 2.86(a); TMEP §§1403.01, 1403.02(c).

 

For an overview of the requirements for a Section 1(b) multiple-class application and how to satisfy the requirements online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, please go to http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/law/multiclass.jsp.

 

Unsigned Application

 

The application was not signed and verified, which are application requirements.  See 15 U.S.C. §§1051(b), 1126(d)-(e); 37 C.F.R. §§2.33(a), (b)(2), 2.34(a)(2), (a)(3)(i), (a)(4)(ii).  Therefore, applicant must verify the statements specified further below in an affidavit or signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20.  See 15 U.S.C. §§1051(b)(3), 1126(d)-(e); 37 C.F.R. §§2.33(a), (b)(2), (c), 2.193(e)(1); TMEP §§804.02, 806.01(b)-(d).

 

To respond to this requirement online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) response form, answer “yes” to the TEAS response form wizard question relating to submitting a “signed declaration,” and follow the instructions within the form for signing. 

 

To respond to this requirement on paper, via regular mail, applicant may provide the following statements and declaration at the end of the response, personally signed by a person authorized under 37 C.F.R. §2.193(e)(1) and dated, with the printed or typed name of the signatory appearing immediately below the signature.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.20, 2.33(a), (b)(2), (c), 2.193(a), (d); TMEP §§611.01(b), 804.01(b).  The signatory’s particular title or position should also be specified.  See TMEP §804.04.

 

STATEMENTS:  The signatory believes that:  the applicant is entitled to use the trademark and/or service mark in commerce; the applicant has a bona fide intention and has had a bona fide intention, as of the application filing date, to use or use through the applicant’s related company or licensee the mark in commerce on or in connection with the goods and/or services in the application; and to the best of the signatory’s knowledge and belief, no other person has the right to use the mark in commerce, either in the identical form or in such near resemblance as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods and/or services of such other person, to cause confusion or mistake, or to deceive. 

 

DECLARATION:  The signatory 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 any registration resulting therefrom, declares that all statements made of his or 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)

 

Response

 

If applicant has questions regarding this Office action, please telephone or e-mail the assigned trademark examining attorney.  All relevant e-mail communications will be placed in the official application record; however, an e-mail communication will not be accepted as a response to this Office action and will not extend the deadline for filing a proper response.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.191; TMEP §§304.01-.02, 709.04-.05.  Further, although the trademark examining attorney may provide additional explanation pertaining to the refusal(s) and/or requirement(s) in this Office action, the trademark examining attorney may not provide legal advice or statements about applicant’s rights.  See TMEP §§705.02, 709.06.

 

 

 

 

 

/David Collier/

Examining Attorney

Law Office 109

571-272-8859

david.collier@uspto.gov (not for formal responses)

 

 

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 the Trademark Electronic Application System (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 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 TEAS form at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/correspondence.jsp.

 

 

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)

 

 

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING YOUR

U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION

 

USPTO OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) HAS ISSUED

ON 7/10/2014 FOR U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 86239782

 

Please follow the instructions below:

 

(1)  TO READ THE LETTER:  Click on this link or go to http://tsdr.uspto.gov,enter the U.S. application serial number, and click on “Documents.”

 

The Office action may not be immediately viewable, to allow for necessary system updates of the application, but will be available within 24 hours of this e-mail notification.

 

(2)  TIMELY RESPONSE IS REQUIRED:  Please 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 7/10/2014 (or sooner if specified in the Office action).  For information regarding response time periods, see http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/process/status/responsetime.jsp.

 

Do NOT hit “Reply” to this e-mail notification, or otherwise e-mail your response because the USPTO does NOT accept e-mails as responses to Office actions.  Instead, the USPTO recommends that you respond online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) response form located at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp.

 

(3)  QUESTIONS:  For questions about the contents of the Office action itself, please contact the assigned trademark examining attorney.  For technical assistance in accessing or viewing the Office action in the Trademark Status and Document Retrieval (TSDR) system, please e-mail TSDR@uspto.gov.

 

WARNING

 

Failure to file the required response by the applicable response deadline will result in the ABANDONMENT of your application.  For more information regarding abandonment, see http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/basics/abandon.jsp.

 

PRIVATE COMPANY SOLICITATIONS REGARDING YOUR APPLICATION:  Private companies not associated with the USPTO are using information provided in trademark applications to mail or e-mail trademark-related solicitations.  These companies often use names that closely resemble the USPTO and their solicitations may look like an official government document.  Many solicitations require that you pay “fees.” 

 

Please carefully review all correspondence you receive regarding this application to make sure that you are responding to an official document from the USPTO rather than a private company solicitation.  All official USPTO correspondence will be mailed only from the “United States Patent and Trademark Office” in Alexandria, VA; or sent by e-mail from the domain “@uspto.gov.”  For more information on how to handle private company solicitations, see http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/solicitation_warnings.jsp.