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.  A RESPONSE TRANSMITTED THROUGH THE TRADEMARK ELECTRONIC APPLICATION SYSTEM (TEAS) MUST BE RECEIVED BEFORE MIDNIGHT EASTERN TIME OF THE LAST DAY OF THE RESPONSE PERIOD.

 

 

ISSUE/MAILING DATE: 6/24/2017

 

INTRODUCTION

 

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

 

The Applicant must address:

 

• Section 2(d) Refusal – Likelihood of Confusion
• Disclaimer Required
• Amendment of identification of goods required

 

 

 

SECTION 2(D) REFUSAL – LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION

 

Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the mark in U.S. Registration No. 4489226.  Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the attached registration.

 

Here, the applicant’s mark is UNIVERSAL KIDS for

 

• Eyeglasses and sunglasses related to children's television programming; tablet computers; game software; video games, namely, video game cartridges and video game discs; downloadable application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices that allow users to play and review audio, video, and audiovisual elements and information relating to children's entertainment content; downloadable application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices, namely, software featuring entertainment and learning activities for children; downloadable application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices for use in streaming and storing audio-visual media content; computer application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices that allow users to play and review audio, video, and audiovisual elements and information relating to children's entertainment content; computer application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices, namely, software featuring entertainment and learning activities for children; computer application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices for use in streaming and storing audio-visual media content; downloadable audio, video and audio-visual multimedia content, namely, audio files, video files and audio-visual files featuring children's entertainment; digital media, namely, downloadable audio, and video and audiovisual files, and multimedia files containing text, audio, video, still images, games, and internet web links, all in the field of children's entertainment; digital media, namely, pre-recorded video cassettes, digital video discs, digital versatile discs, downloadable audio and video recordings, DVDs, and high definition digital discs all in the field of children's entertainment; a series of motion picture films featuring children's entertainment; media players for children; portable media players for children; computer peripheral equipment; eyeglass and sunglass cases related to a children's television series; accessories for mobile, portable and handheld devices related to a children's television series, namely, protective covers, protective carrying cases, headphones, audio and bass speakers, earbuds, batteries; magnetically encoded gift cards; decorative magnets; downloadable electronic publications, namely, informational sheets, informational flyers, leaflets, newsletters, periodicals, books and manuals featuring information relating to children's entertainment; downloadable electronic publications, in the nature of books and periodicals in the field of children's entertainment; pre-recorded media, namely, digital audio and video tapes, DVDs, CDs, discs and MP3 players featuring electronic books, music, movies and other entertainment audio-visual programming related to a children's television series; blank flash drives; downloadable ringtones for mobile phones; interactive computer games for children; computer screensaver software, images, videos and music files downloadable via a global computer network and via wireless devices, all featuring children's entertainment; 3-D glasses; Game software; interactive computer games; computer application software and downloadable application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices that allow users to play and review audio, video, and audiovisual elements and information relating to children's entertainment and educational content; computer application software and downloadable application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices, namely, software featuring entertainment and learning activities for children; computer application software and downloadable application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices for use in streaming and storing audio-visual media content; downloadable audio, video and audio-visual multimedia content, namely, audio files, video files and audio-visual files featuring children's entertainment and educational content; digital media, namely, downloadable audio, and video and audiovisual files, and multimedia files containing music, text, audio, video, still images, games, and internet web links, all in the field of children's entertainment and educational content; downloadable electronic publications, in the nature of books and periodicals in the field of children's entertainment and educational content

 

and the registrant’s is UNIVERSAL MOM for

 

• Digital media, namely, pre-recorded DVDs, downloadable audio and video recordings, and CDs featuring and promoting self esteem and personal development for children. Downloadable publications in the nature of articles, essays, program materials, checklists, electronic newsletters in the field of self esteem and personal development for children.

 

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, 1361, 177 USPQ 563, 567 (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

 

Marks are compared in their entireties for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression.  Stone Lion Capital Partners, LP v. Lion Capital LLP, 746 F.3d 1317, 1321, 110 USPQ2d 1157, 1160 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (quoting Palm Bay Imps., Inc. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee En 1772, 396 F.3d 1369, 1371, 73 USPQ2d 1689, 1691 (Fed. Cir. 2005)); TMEP §1207.01(b)-(b)(v).  “Similarity in any one of these elements may be sufficient to find the marks confusingly similar.”  In re Davia, 110 USPQ2d 1810, 1812 (TTAB 2014) (citing In re 1st USA Realty Prof’ls, Inc., 84 USPQ2d 1581, 1586 (TTAB 2007)); In re White Swan Ltd., 8 USPQ2d 1534, 1535 (TTAB 1988)); TMEP §1207.01(b).

 

Here, the applicant's standard character mark UNIVERSAL KIDS is confusingly similar to the registrant's/registrants' standard character mark UNIVERSAL MOM.

 

The marks begin with the same inherently distinctive wording UNIVERSAL, which is identical in appearance, sound, and overall commercial impression, namely, evoking thoughts about worldliness, inclusion, or someone or something that is well-rounded.  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) (“VEUVE . . . remains a ‘prominent feature’ as the first word in the mark and the first word to appear on the label”); In re Integrated Embedded, 102 USPQ2d 1504, 1513 (TTAB 2016) (“[T]he dominance of BARR in [a]pplicant’s mark BARR GROUP is reinforced by its location as the first word in the mark.”); 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).  Because UNIVERSAL is the first wording in the marks, consumers will focus on it for source identification, thereby making it the dominant feature of the marks.  Greater weight is often given to this dominant feature when determining whether marks are confusingly similar.  See In re Nat’l Data Corp., 753 F.2d at 1058, 224 USPQ at 751.

 

The applicant's mark also includes the wording KIDS, and the registrant's mark contains the additional wording MOM.  However, these additions are insufficient to obviate the similarities between the marks.  Specifically, each of these words respectively describes the intended audience or consumers of the goods.   Matter that is descriptive of or generic for a party’s goods and/or services is typically less significant or less dominant in relation to other wording in a mark.  See Anheuser-Busch, LLC v. Innvopak Sys. Pty Ltd., 115 USPQ2d 1816, 1824-25 (TTAB 2015) (citing In re Chatam Int’l Inc., 380 F.3d 1340, 1342-43, 71 USPQ2d 1944, 1946 (Fed. Cir. 2004)).  Thus, this wording is less significant in terms of affecting the mark's overall commercial impression, and the wording UNIVERSAL remains the dominant element of the marks.

 

For these reasons, when consumers encounter the parties' goods using marks with these similarities, they are likely to be confused as to the source of the goods.  Therefore, the marks are confusingly similar.

 

Relatedness of the Goods

 

The goods 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 need only be “related in some manner and/or if the circumstances surrounding their marketing are 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).

 

 

Here, the applicant's software goods are closely related to the registrant's software goods.  Specifically, as drafted, applicant’s software goods encompass registrant’s software goods.

 

With respect to applicant’s and registrant’s goods, 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 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, e.g., Sw. Mgmt., Inc. v. Ocinomled, Ltd., 115 USPQ2d 1007, 1025 (TTAB 2015); In re N.A.D., Inc., 57 USPQ2d 1872, 1874 (TTAB 2000).   

 

In this case, the identification set forth in the application and registration 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/registration use broad wording to describe it’s educational and entertainment software for children and this wording is presumed to encompass all goods of the type described, including those in registrant’s more narrow identification.

 

As the attached Internet evidence establishes, “education” is broadly defined the act or process of educating or being educated, without limitation to one particular type of education or subject. Therefore, applicant’s educational software could encompass registrant’s goods, namely, software meant to educate parents and children on the importance of self-esteem.

 

In addition, the attached Internet evidence from PBS Go demonstrates that software for kids in the field of education and emotional intelligence (self-esteem, etc) commonly emanate from the same source and/or are available in the same channels of trade. Therefore, applicant’s and registrant’s goods and/or services are considered related for likelihood of confusion purposes.  See, e.g., In re Davey Prods. Pty Ltd., 92 USPQ2d 1198, 1202-04 (TTAB 2009); In re Toshiba Med. Sys. Corp., 91 USPQ2d 1266, 1268-69, 1271-72 (TTAB 2009).

 

Collectively, this evidence demonstrates that the parties' goods are similar in nature. For these reasons, consumers are likely to mistakenly conclude that the goods emanate from the same source.  Therefore, the goods are closely related. 

 

Because the marks are confusingly similar and the goods are closely related, consumers are likely to be confused as to the source of the goods.  Thus, registration is refused pursuant to Trademark Act Section 2(d). 

 

 

 

Response to Refusal

 

Although the applicant's mark has been refused registration, the applicant may respond to the refusal by submitting evidence and offering argument against the refusal and in support of registration.

 

REQUIREMENTS

 

If the applicant responds to the refusal, then the applicant also must respond to the below requirements.

 

DISCLAIMER REQUIRED

 

Applicant must disclaim the wording “KIDS” because it merely describes an intended audience or consumer of applicant’s goods, and thus is an unregistrable component of the mark.  See 15 U.S.C. §§1052(e)(1), 1056(a); DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd., 695 F.3d 1247, 1251, 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1755 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting In re Oppedahl & Larson LLP, 373 F.3d 1171, 1173, 71 USPQ2d 1370, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2004)); TMEP §§1213, 1213.03(a). 

 

The wording “children” appears in applicant’s identification of goods and, as evidenced by the attached, “kids” is a common abbreviation for children.  Therefore, the wording merely describes and intended audience or consumer of applicant’s goods.

 

An applicant may not claim exclusive rights to terms that others may need to use to describe their goods and/or services in the marketplace.  See Dena Corp. v. Belvedere Int’l, Inc., 950 F.2d 1555, 1560, 21 USPQ2d 1047, 1051 (Fed. Cir. 1991); In re Aug. Storck KG, 218 USPQ 823, 825 (TTAB 1983).  A disclaimer of unregistrable matter does not affect the appearance of the mark; that is, a disclaimer does not physically remove the disclaimed matter from the mark.  See Schwarzkopf v. John H. Breck, Inc., 340 F.2d 978, 978, 144 USPQ 433, 433 (C.C.P.A. 1965); TMEP §1213. 

 

If applicant does not provide the required disclaimer, the USPTO may refuse to register the entire mark.  See In re Stereotaxis Inc., 429 F.3d 1039, 1040-41, 77 USPQ2d 1087, 1088-89 (Fed. Cir. 2005); TMEP §1213.01(b).

 

Applicant should submit a disclaimer in the following standardized format:

 

No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “KIDS” apart from the mark as shown.

 

For an overview of disclaimers and instructions on how to satisfy this disclaimer requirement online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, please go to http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/law/disclaimer.jsp.

 

 

AMENDMENT OF IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS REQUIRED

 

Portions of the wording in the identification of goods are unacceptable because they contain indefinite language.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01. The USPTO requires applicants to identify the goods and services with specificity in order to provide public notice and to enable the USPTO to classify the goods and services properly and to reach informed judgments concerning likelihood of confusion under 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).  The USPTO has discretion to require the degree of particularity deemed necessary to clearly identify the goods and/or services covered by the mark.   In re Omega SA, 494 F.3d 1362, 83 USPQ2d 1541 (Fed. Cir. 2007).

 

In addition, the identification of goods includes a duplicate entry of the wording “game software” and clarification is required.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.01(a).  Applicant may either (1) modify one of these two identical descriptions of goods and/or services such that it will no longer be duplicative, or (2) delete one entry.  See TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.01(a).  If modifying one of the duplicate identifications, applicant may amend it to clarify or limit the goods and/or services, but not to broaden or expand the goods and/or services beyond those in the original application or as acceptably amended.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06.  Also, generally, any deleted goods and/or services may not later be reinserted.  TMEP §1402.07(e).

 

Applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate (additions in bold, deletions crossed-out, explanations in italics):

Eyeglasses and sunglasses related to children's television programming featuring characters from children’s television programs; tablet computers; game software; video games, namely, video game cartridges and video game discs; downloadable application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices that allow users to play and review audio, video, and audiovisual elements and information relating to children's entertainment content; downloadable application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices, namely, software featuring entertainment and learning activities for children; downloadable application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices for use in streaming and storing audio-visual media content; computer application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices that allow users to play and review audio, video, and audiovisual elements and information relating to children's entertainment content; computer application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices, namely, software featuring entertainment and learning activities for children; computer application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices for use in streaming and storing audio-visual media content; downloadable audio, video and audio-visual multimedia content, namely, audio files, video files and audio-visual files featuring children's entertainment; digital media, namely, downloadable audio, and video and audiovisual files, and multimedia files containing text, audio, video, still images, games, and internet web links, all in the field of children's entertainment; digital media, namely, pre-recorded video cassettes, digital video discs, digital versatile discs, downloadable audio and video recordings, DVDs, and high definition digital discs all in the field of children's entertainment; a series of motion picture films featuring children's entertainment; media players for children; portable media players for children; computer peripheral equipment; eyeglass and sunglass cases related to children's television programming featuring characters from children’s television programs; accessories for mobile, portable and handheld devices related to children's television programming featuring characters from children’s television programs, namely, protective covers,  and protective carrying cases for mobile phones, portable music players and tablet computers, headphones, audio and bass speakers, earbuds, and batteries; magnetically encoded gift cards; decorative magnets; downloadable electronic publications, namely, informational sheets, informational flyers, leaflets, newsletters, periodicals, books and manuals featuring information relating to children's entertainment; downloadable electronic publications, in the nature of books and periodicals in the field of children's entertainment; Digital media, namely, pre-recorded media, namely, digital audio and video tapes, DVDs, CDs, discs and MP3s players featuring electronic books, music, movies and other entertainment audio-visual programming related to a children's television series; blank flash drives; downloadable ringtones for mobile phones; interactive computer games programs;  for children; computer screensaver software, featuring images, videos and music files downloadable via a global computer network and via wireless devices, all featuring children's entertainment; 3-D spectacles glasses; Game software; interactive computer games programs; downloadable computer application software and downloadable application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices, namely, mobile phones, tablet computers, and MP3 players,  that allow users to play and review audio, video, and audiovisual elements and information relating to children's entertainment and educational content; downloadable computer application software namely, software featuring entertainment and learning activities for children for and downloadable application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices, namely, mobile phones, tablet computers, and MP3 players; downloadable computer application software and downloadable application software for mobile, portable and handheld devices, namely, mobile phones, tablet computers, and MP3 players,  for use in streaming and storing audio-visual media content; downloadable audio, video and audio-visual multimedia content, namely, audio files, video files and audio-visual files featuring children's entertainment and educational content; digital media, namely, downloadable audio, and video and audiovisual files, and multimedia files containing music, text, audio, video, still images, games, and internet web links, all in the field of children's entertainment and educational content; downloadable electronic publications, in the nature of books and periodicals in the field of children's entertainment and educational content

 

Applicant’s goods may be clarified or limited, but may not be expanded beyond those originally itemized in the application or as acceptably amended.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06.  Applicant may clarify or limit the identification by inserting qualifying language or deleting items to result in a more specific identification; however, applicant may not substitute different goods or add goods not found or encompassed by those in the original application or as acceptably amended.  See TMEP §1402.06(a)-(b).  The scope of the goods sets the outer limit for any changes to the identification and is generally determined by the ordinary meaning of the wording in the identification.  TMEP §§1402.06(b), 1402.07(a)-(b).  Any acceptable changes to the goods will further limit scope, and once goods and/or services are deleted, they are not permitted to be reinserted.  TMEP §1402.07(e).

 

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.  See TMEP §1402.04.

RESPONSE GUIDELINES

 

For this application to proceed further, applicant must explicitly address each refusal and/or requirement raised in this Office action.  If the action includes a refusal, applicant may provide arguments and/or evidence as to why the refusal should be withdrawn and the mark should register.  Applicant may also have other options specified in this Office action for responding to a refusal and should consider those options carefully.  To respond to requirements and certain refusal response options, applicant should set forth in writing the required changes or statements.  For more information and general tips on responding to USPTO Office actions, response options, and how to file a response online, see “Responding to Office Actions” on the USPTO’s website.

 

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 and the trademark will fail to register.  See 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.65(a), 2.68(a); TMEP §§718.01, 718.02.  Additionally, the USPTO will not refund the application filing fee, which is a required processing fee.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.6(a)(1)(i)-(iv), 2.209(a); TMEP §405.04.

 

When an application has abandoned for failure to respond to an Office action, an applicant may timely file a 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.  The petition must be filed within two months of the date of issuance of the notice of abandonment and may be filed online via the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) with a $100 fee.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.6(a)(15)(ii), 2.66(b)(1).

 

 

Responses to Office actions must be properly signed.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(b), 2.193(e)(2); TMEP §§712, 712.01.  If an applicant is not represented by an attorney, the response must be signed by the individual applicant or someone with legal authority to bind a juristic applicant (e.g., a corporate officer or general partner).  See 37 C.F.R. §2.193(e)(2)(ii); TMEP §§611.03(b), 611.06(b)-(h), 712.01.  In the case of joint applicants, all must sign.  37 C.F.R. §2.193(e)(2)(ii); TMEP §611.06(a).  If an applicant is represented by an attorney authorized to practice before the USPTO, the attorney must sign the response.  37 C.F.R. §2.193(e)(2)(i); TMEP §§611.03(b), 712.01. 

 

 

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 $125 per 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 or e-mail without incurring this additional fee.  

 

 

 

Turner, Jessica (Lauren)

/J Lauren Turner/

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 123

(571) 272-9890

Jessica.Turner1@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 6/24/2017 FOR U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 87448454

 

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 6/24/2017 (or sooner if specified in the Office action).  A response transmitted through the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) must be received before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  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 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.