To: | AQ Textiles LLC (anita@aqtextilesusa.com) |
Subject: | U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 86719948 - PIMA SUPREME 100% PIMA COTTON - N/A |
Sent: | 9/10/2015 1:10:55 PM |
Sent As: | ECOM117@USPTO.GOV |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 Attachment - 5 Attachment - 6 Attachment - 7 Attachment - 8 |
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 86719948
MARK: PIMA SUPREME 100% PIMA COTTON
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: |
CLICK HERE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER: http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp
|
APPLICANT: AQ Textiles LLC
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS: |
|
EXAMINER’S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY 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: 9/10/2015
DATABASE SEARCH: The trademark examining attorney has searched the USPTO’s database of registered and pending marks and has found no conflicting marks that would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d). TMEP §704.02; see 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).
ISSUES APPLICANT MUST ADDRESS: On September 10, 2015, the trademark examining attorney and Ms. Anita Zampino discussed the issues below. Applicant must timely respond to these issues. See 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §2.62(a); TMEP §§708, 711. To avoid abandonment, applicant must respond to this Office action within six months of the date of issuance of the action. See 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §2.62(a); TMEP §§708.03, 708.04, 711.
SUMMARY OF ISSUES applicant must address:
SECTION 2(e)(1) REFUSAL – MERELY DESCRIPTIVE
A mark is merely descriptive if “it immediately conveys knowledge of a quality, feature, function, or characteristic of [an applicant’s] goods or services.” In re The Chamber of Commerce of the U.S., 675 F.3d 1297, 1300, 102 USPQ2d 1217, 1219 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting In re Bayer Aktiengesellschaft, 488 F.3d 960, 963, 82 USPQ2d 1828, 1831 (Fed. Cir. 2007)); TMEP §1209.01(b); see DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd., 695 F.3d 1247, 1251, 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1755 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting In re Abcor Dev. Corp., 588 F.2d 811, 814, 200 USPQ 215, 218 (C.C.P.A. 1978)).
Applicant’s mark is “PIMA SUPREME 100% PIMA COTTON” for “Bed and table linen; Bed linen; Bed sheets; Bedsheets; Fitted bed sheets; Flat bed sheets; Pillow cases; Pillowcases; Sheet sets” in International Class 24. The attached dictionary evidence shows that the term “PIMA COTTON” is defined as “a very strong, high-grade cotton of medium staple developed from selected Egyptian cottons in the southwest United States.”
The term “SUPREME” is defined as “highest in degree or quality.” The term “SUPREME” is therefore merely laudatory. “Marks that are merely laudatory and descriptive of the alleged merit of a product [or service] are . . .
regarded as being descriptive” because “[s]elf-laudatory or puffing marks are regarded as a condensed form of describing the character or quality of the goods [or services].” DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd., 695 F.3d 1247, 1256, 103 USPQ2d
1753, 1759 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting In re The Boston Beer Co., 198 F.3d 1370, 1373, 53 USPQ2d 1056, 1058 (Fed. Cir. 1999)); see In re Dos
Padres Inc., 49 USPQ2d 1860 (TTAB 1998) (QUESO QUESADILLA SUPREME merely descriptive of cheese); Supreme Wine Co., Inc. v. The American Distilling Co., 135 USPQ 481 (2d Cir
1962)(SUPREME for vodka held descriptive); Ex Parte I. Lewis Cigar Manufacturing Company, 95 USPQ 225 (PTO 1952) (THE CIGAR SUPREME held incapable on the Supplemental
Register).
Therefore, taken together, consumers would view “PIMA SUPREME” as merely describing a feature of the goods—i.e., bed sheets, pillow cases, etc. that are made of pima cotton and are high in quality.
It is important to note that the other wording in the mark—“100% PIMA COTTON”—is merely informational and does not indicate source.
For the foregoing reasons, the examining attorney finds that the proposed mark does nothing more than succinctly describe a feature of applicant’s goods. No thought or imagination is required by consumers to understand this feature of applicant’s goods when the mark and identified goods and are considered together.
Therefore, registration is refused under Section 2(e)(1) 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.
Applicant should also be aware of the following.
SUPPLEMENTAL REGISTER ADVISORY
APPLICATION HAS BEEN AMENDED: In accordance with the authorization granted by the individual identified in the Priority Action section above, the trademark examining attorney has amended the application as indicated below. Please advise the undersigned immediately of any objections. TMEP §707. Any amendments to the identification of goods and/or services may clarify or limit the goods and/or services, but may not 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.
IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS
The identification of goods is amended to read as follows:
See TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.01(e).
DISCLAIMER
The following disclaimer statement is added to the record:
No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “PIMA” and “100% PIMA COTTON” apart from the mark as shown.
See 15 U.S.C. §1056(a); TMEP §§1213, 1213.08(a)(i).
MARK DESCRIPTION
The following description of the mark is added to the record:
The mark consists of the stylized wording “PIMA SUPREME” wherein the wording is underlined except for the first letter “P” in “PIMA” and the last letter “E” in “SUPREME”. Beneath this is the stylized wording “100% PIMA COTTON”.
See 37 C.F.R. §2.37; TMEP §§808 et seq.
RESPONSE GUIDELINES
If applicant does not respond to this Office action within six months of the issue/mailing date, or responds by expressly abandoning the application, the application process will end, the trademark will fail to register, and the application fee will not be refunded. See 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.65(a), 2.68(a), 2.209(a); TMEP §§405.04, 718.01, 718.02. Where the application has been abandoned for failure to respond to an Office action, applicant’s only option would be to file a timely petition to revive the application, which, if granted, would allow the application to return to active status. See 37 C.F.R. §2.66; TMEP §1714. There is a $100 fee for such petitions. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.6, 2.66(b)(1).
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.
/Eric Sable/
Examining Attorney
Law Office 117
571-272-4653
Eric.Sable@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.