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: 6/13/2015

 

 

TEAS PLUS OR TEAS REDUCED FEE (TEAS RF) APPLICANTS – TO MAINTAIN LOWER FEE, ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET, INCLUDING SUBMITTING DOCUMENTS ONLINE:  Applicants who filed their application online using the lower-fee TEAS Plus or TEAS RF application form must (1) file certain documents online using TEAS, including responses to Office actions (see TMEP §§819.02(b), 820.02(b) for a complete list of these documents); (2) maintain a valid e-mail correspondence address; and (3) agree to receive correspondence from the USPTO by e-mail throughout the prosecution of the application.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.22(b), 2.23(b); TMEP §§819, 820.  TEAS Plus or TEAS RF applicants who do not meet these requirements must submit an additional processing fee of $50 per international class of goods and/or services.  37 C.F.R. §§2.6(a)(1)(v), 2.22(c), 2.23(c); TMEP §§819.04, 820.04.  However, in certain situations, TEAS Plus or TEAS RF applicants may respond to an Office action by authorizing an examiner’s amendment by telephone without incurring this additional fee. 

 

 

The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney.  Applicant must respond timely and completely to the issues below.  15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES

• Section 2(d) Refusal- Likelihood of Confusion
• Foreign Registration Required
• Identification of Goods and Services

 

 

SECTION 2(d) REFUSAL- LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION

 

Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the marks in U.S. Registration Nos. 1085885, 1085886, 2695815, 2697891, 2808775, 3206728, 4428271, 4428274, and 4244960.  Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the enclosed registrations which are summarized below.

 

 

U.S. Registration No. 1085885 for the mark SPS for metal fasteners and fastener devices-namely, nuts, bolts, screws, pins, plugs and collars

 

 

U.S. Registration No. 1085886 for the mark SPS for metal fasteners and fastener devices-namely, nuts, bolts, screws, pins, plugs and collars

 

 

U.S. Registration No. 2695815 for the mark SPS for data collection services, namely obtaining, evaluating, and analyzing data in the field of engineering and equipment reliability; and consulting services in the field of engineering and equipment reliability

 

 

U.S. Registration No. 2697891 for the mark SPS and design for data collection services, namely obtaining, evaluating, and analyzing data in the field of engineering and equipment reliability; and consulting services in the field of engineering and equipment reliability

 

 

U.S. Registration No. 2808775 for the mark SPS and design for data collection services, namely obtaining, evaluating, and analyzing data in the field of engineering and equipment reliability; and consulting services in the field of engineering and reliability

 

 

U.S. Registration No. 3206728 for the mark SPS for application service provider, namely, hosting software applications and providing non-downloadable software to others relating to the delivery and management of capital assets, design management, production management, supply chain management, fabrication, value stream management, and management of logistics and final assembly in the construction, fixed position manufacturing and logistics management fields; consulting services relating to software application configuration and organizational development in the construction, fixed positions manufacturing and logistics management fields

 

 

U.S. Registration No. 4428271 for the mark SPS for providing temporary use of on-line non-downloadable software for use in data collection in the field of engineering and equipment reliability

 

 

U.S. Registration No. 4428274 for the mark SPS and design providing temporary use of on-line non-downloadable software for use in data collection in the field of engineering and equipment reliability

 

 

U.S. Registration No. 4244960 for the mark SPS for engineering and systems engineering services in the fields of three dimensional computer modeling and simulation for use in military operations, project management, logistical support services, inventory control, fielding new government weapons and equipment, and acquisition and lifecycle management of software-intensive systems; software engineering services

 

Applicant’s mark is SPS for Traffic route control systems mainly consisting of steel guard rails, single or double safety fences, mobile and stationary guide walls and guard walls of steel or steel combined with concrete, mobile and stationary impact absorbers of steel or steel combined with concrete, in particular finished steel parts and protection systems consisting thereof; energy-absorbing arch heads, including being parts of steel guard rails for traffic routes, end-constructions for protective devices, including guard walls and guard rails; junctions and connectors for passive protective devices for roads; all of the aforesaid goods consisting wholly or predominantly of steel; anchors of steel, steel posts, including the aforesaid goods for use in/for the creating of traffic route control systems; Traffic route control systems mainly consisting of steel guard rails, single or double safety fences, mobile and stationary guide walls and guard walls of concrete or concrete combined with steel, mobile and stationary impact absorbers of concrete or concrete combined with steel, in particular finished concrete parts and protection systems consisting thereof; energy-absorbing end structures on protective devices, including protective walls and crash barriers; junctions and connectors for passive protective devices for roads; all of the aforesaid goods consisting wholly or predominantly of concrete; including the aforesaid goods for use in/for the creating of traffic route control systems; Construction drafting and architectural consultancy in the field of road and traffic route safety engineering

 

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 and/or services 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)).  Not all the du Pont factors, however, 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 at 1355, 98 USPQ2d at 1260; 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.

 

Similarity of the Marks

 

U.S. Registration Nos. 1085885, 1085886, 2695815, 3206728, 4428271, and 4244960- In a likelihood of confusion determination, the marks in their entireties are compared for similarities in appearance, sound, 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)-(b)(v). 

 

In the present case, applicant’s mark is SPS and registrants’ mark is SPS.  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 registrants’ respective goods and/or services.

 

Therefore, these marks are confusingly similar. 

 

U.S. Registration Nos. 2697891, 2808775 and 2697891- The respective marks are virtually identical.  All of the marks contain the identical acronym SPS.  The marks in U.S. Registration Nos. 2697891, 2808775 and 2697891 have also added a design element.  Although marks must be compared in their entireties, the word portion generally may be the dominant and most significant feature of a mark because consumers will request the goods and/or services using the wording.  See In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 1366, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908, 1911 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Davia, 110 USPQ2d 1810, 1813 (TTAB 2014).  For this reason, greater weight is often given to the word portion of marks when determining whether marks are confusingly similar.  Joel Gott Wines, LLC v. Rehoboth Von Gott, Inc., 107 USPQ2d 1424, 1431 (TTAB 2013) (citing In re Dakin’s Miniatures, Inc., 59 USPQ2d 1593, 1596 (TTAB 1999)); TMEP §1207.01(c)(ii). 

 

The average purchaser’s recollection of requesting the goods and/or services by the identical acronym SPS will confuse people into believing that the goods and services come from a common source.  When comparing marks, the test is not whether the marks can be distinguished in a side-by-side comparison, but rather whether the marks are sufficiently similar in terms of their overall commercial impression that confusion as to the source of the goods and/or services offered under the respective marks is likely to result.  Midwestern Pet Foods, Inc. v. Societe des Produits Nestle S.A., 685 F.3d 1046, 1053, 103 USPQ2d 1435, 1440 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Davia, 110 USPQ2d 1810, 1813 (TTAB 2014); 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.  United Global Media Grp., Inc. v. Tseng, 112 USPQ2d 1039, 1049, (TTAB 2014); L’Oreal S.A. v. Marcon, 102 USPQ2d 1434, 1438 (TTAB 2012); TMEP §1207.01(b). Thus these marks are confusingly similar.

 

Similarity of the Goods and Services

 

Applicant’s goods and services are traffic route control systems mainly consisting of steel guard rails, single or double safety fences, mobile and stationary guide walls and guard walls of steel or steel combined with concrete, mobile and stationary impact absorbers of steel or steel combined with concrete, in particular finished steel parts and protection systems consisting thereof; energy-absorbing arch heads, including being parts of steel guard rails for traffic routes, end-constructions for protective devices, including guard walls and guard rails; junctions and connectors for passive protective devices for roads; all of the aforesaid goods consisting wholly or predominantly of steel; anchors of steel, steel posts, including the aforesaid goods for use in/for the creating of traffic route control systems; Traffic route control systems mainly consisting of steel guard rails, single or double safety fences, mobile and stationary guide walls and guard walls of concrete or concrete combined with steel, mobile and stationary impact absorbers of concrete or concrete combined with steel, in particular finished concrete parts and protection systems consisting thereof; energy-absorbing end structures on protective devices, including protective walls and crash barriers; junctions and connectors for passive protective devices for roads; all of the aforesaid goods consisting wholly or predominantly of concrete; including the aforesaid goods for use in/for the creating of traffic route control systems; Construction drafting and architectural consultancy in the field of road and traffic route safety engineering

 

The goods for U.S. Registration Nos. 1085885 and 1085886 are metal fasteners and fastener devices-namely, nuts, bolts, screws, pins, plugs and collars.  The services for U.S. Registration Nos. 2695815, 2697891 and 2808775 are data collection services, namely obtaining, evaluating, and analyzing data in the field of engineering and equipment reliability; and consulting services in the field of engineering and equipment reliability. The services for U.S. Registration No. 3206728 are application service provider, namely, hosting software applications and providing non-downloadable software to others relating to the delivery and management of capital assets, design management, production management, supply chain management, fabrication, value stream management, and management of logistics and final assembly in the construction, fixed position manufacturing and logistics management fields; consulting services relating to software application configuration and organizational development in the construction, fixed positions manufacturing and logistics management fields.  The services for U.S. Registration Nos. 4428271 and 4428274 are providing temporary use of on-line non-downloadable software for use in data collection in the field of engineering and equipment reliability. The services for U.S. Registration No. 4244960 are engineering and systems engineering services in the fields of three dimensional computer modeling and simulation for use in military operations, project management, logistical support services, inventory control, fielding new government weapons and equipment, and acquisition and lifecycle management of software-intensive systems; software engineering services.

 

The goods and/or services of the parties need not be identical or even competitive to find a likelihood of confusion.  See On-line Careline Inc. v. Am. Online Inc., 229 F.3d 1080, 1086, 56 USPQ2d 1471, 1475 (Fed. Cir. 2000); Recot, Inc. v. Becton, 214 F.3d 1322, 1329, 54 USPQ2d 1894, 1898 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (“[E]ven if the goods in question are different from, and thus not related to, one another in kind, the same goods can be related in the mind of the consuming public as to the origin of the goods.”); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i). 

 

The respective goods and/or services need only be “related in some manner and/or if the circumstances surrounding their marketing [be] such that they could give rise to the mistaken belief that [the goods and/or services] emanate from the same source.”  Coach Servs., Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356, 1369, 101 USPQ2d 1713, 1722 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting 7-Eleven Inc. v. Wechsler, 83 USPQ2d 1715, 1724 (TTAB 2007)); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i).

 

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 Stone Lion Capital Partners, LP v. Lion Capital LLP, 746 F.3d 1317, 1323, 110 USPQ2d 1157, 1162 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (quoting 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 registrations 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, with respect to U.S. Registration Nos. 1085885 and 1085886 the application uses broad wording to describe the goods and this wording is presumed to encompass all goods and services of the type described, including those in registrant’s more narrow identification. Accordingly, applicant’s drafting and architectural consultancy and traffic route control systems consisting of various parts could encompass the use of registrant’s metal fasteners and fastener devices.

 

Similarly with respect to U.S. Registration Nos. 2695815, 2697891, 2808775, 3206728, 4428271, 4428274, and 4244960 the registrations use broad wording to describe the services and this wording is presumed to encompass all goods and/or services of the type described, including those in applicant’s more narrow identification.  Accordingly, registrants’  data collection services, namely obtaining, evaluating, and analyzing data in the field of engineering and equipment reliability; and consulting services in the field of engineering and equipment reliability; application service provider, namely, hosting software applications and providing non-downloadable software to others relating to the delivery and management of capital assets, design management, production management, supply chain management, fabrication, value stream management, and management of logistics and final assembly in the construction, fixed position manufacturing and logistics management fields; consulting services relating to software application configuration and organizational development in the construction, fixed positions manufacturing and logistics management fields;  providing temporary use of on-line non-downloadable software for use in data collection in the field of engineering and equipment reliability; and engineering and systems engineering services in the fields of three dimensional computer modeling and simulation for use in military operations, project management, logistical support services, inventory control, fielding new government weapons and equipment, and acquisition and lifecycle management of software-intensive systems; software engineering services, could all encompass providing applicant’s traffic route control systems consisting of various parts and drafting and architectural consultancy.

 

In total the marks are identical or virtually identical and the goods and/or services are related.  Therefore, consumers are likely to be confused and mistakenly believe that the goods and/or services come from a common source.  Accordingly, registration is refused under Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act.

 

 

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

 

 

If applicant responds to the refusals, applicant must also respond to the requirements set forth below.

 

 

FOREIGN REGISTRATION REQUIRED

 

 

The application specifies Trademark Act Section 44(d) as the sole filing basis and indicates that applicant intends to rely on Section 44(e) as a basis for registration; however no copy of a foreign registration was provided.  See 15 U.S.C. §1126(d), (e). 

 

An application with a Section 44(e) basis must include a true copy, photocopy, certification, or certified copy of a foreign registration from an applicant’s country of origin.  15 U.S.C. §1126(e); 37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(3)(ii); TMEP §§1004, 1004.01, 1016.  In addition, the applicant’s country of origin must be a party to a convention or treaty relating to trademarks to which the United States is also a party, or must extend reciprocal registration rights to nationals of the United States by law.  15 U.S.C. §1126(b); TMEP §§1002.01, 1004.

 

Therefore, applicant must provide a copy of the foreign registration from applicant’s country of origin when it becomes available.  TMEP §1003.04(a).  A copy of a foreign registration must consist of a document issued to an applicant by, or certified by, the intellectual property office in applicant’s country of origin.  TMEP §1004.01.  If applicant’s country of origin does not issue registrations or Madrid Protocol certificates of extension of protection, the applicant may submit a copy of the Madrid Protocol international registration that shows that protection of the international registration has been extended to applicant’s country of origin.  TMEP §1016.  In addition, applicant must also provide an English translation if the foreign registration is not written in English.  37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(3)(ii); TMEP §1004.01(a)-(b).  The translation should be signed by the translator.  TMEP §1004.01(b).

 

If the foreign registration is not yet available, applicant should inform the trademark examining attorney that the foreign application is still pending and request that the U.S. application be suspended until a copy of the foreign registration is available.  TMEP §§716.02(b), 1003.04(a).

 

If applicant cannot satisfy the requirements of the Section 44(e) basis, applicant may amend the basis to Section 1(a) or 1(b), if applicant can satisfy the requirements for the new basis.  See 15 U.S.C. §§1051(a)-(b), 1126(e); TMEP §806.03.  Please note that, if the U.S. application satisfied the requirements of Section 44(d) as of the U.S. application filing date, applicant may retain the priority filing date under Section 44(d) without perfecting the Section 44(e) basis, provided there is a continuing valid basis for registration.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.35(b)(3)-(4); TMEP §§806.02(f), 806.03(h).  

IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS AND SERVICES

 

 

The identification of services in International Class 042 is acceptable as written. The identification of goods in International Classes 006 and 019 is indefinite and must be clarified because it is too broad and could include goods in other international classes.  See TMEP §1402.01 §1402.03. 

 

Applicant should note that the wording in bold ALL CAPS below shows the changes being proposed for the identification of goods and services.  Items with a strike through are to be deleted (e.g., toilet). When making its amendments, applicant should enter them in standard font, not bold ALL CAPS or with a strike through.

 

Applicant may adopt the following identification and classification of goods and/or services, if accurate:

 

International Class 006:  Traffic route control systems mainly consisting of steel guard rails, single or double STEEL safety fences, mobile and stationary STEEL guide walls and guard walls of steel or PRIMARILY steel combined with concrete, mobile and stationary impact absorbers of steel or steel combined with concrete, in particular finished steel parts and protection systems consisting thereof; energy-absorbing STEEL arch heads, including NAMELY, being parts of steel guard rails for traffic routes, end-constructions for protective devices, including STEEL guard walls and STEEL guard rails; STEEL junctions and STEEL connectors for passive protective devices for roads;, all of the aforesaid goods consisting wholly or predominantly of steel; anchors of steel, steel posts, including the aforesaid goods for use in/for the creating of traffic route control systems

 

 

 

International Class 019:  Traffic route control systems mainly consisting of steel guard rails, [this would be in International Class 006- see above] single or double NON-METAL safety fences, mobile and stationary NON-METAL guide walls and guard walls PRIMARILY of concrete or PRIMARILY concrete combined with steel, mobile and stationary impact absorbers of concrete or concrete combined with steel, in particular finished concrete parts and protection systems consisting thereof; NON-METAL energy-absorbing end structures on protective devices, including NAMELY, CONCRETE protective walls and CONCRETE crash barriers; CONCRETE junctions and connectors for passive protective devices for roads;, all of the aforesaid goods consisting wholly or predominantly of concrete; including the aforesaid goods for use in/for the creating of traffic route control systems

 

International Class 042:  Construction drafting and architectural consultancy in the field of road and traffic route safety engineering

 

 

An applicant may only amend an identification to clarify or limit the goods and/or services, but not to add to or broaden the scope of the goods and/or services.  37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); see TMEP §§1402.06 et seq., 1402.07.

 

For assistance with identifying and classifying goods and services in trademark applications, 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.

 

 

 

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. §§2.62(c), 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.

 

 

 

/Shavell McPherson-Rayburn/

Shavell McPherson-Rayburn

Examining Attorney

Law Office 105

571-272-6121

Shavell.mcpherson-rayburn@uspto.gov

 

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 6/13/2015 FOR U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 86557011

 

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 6/13/2015 (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.