To: | NUVASIVE, INC. (docketing@fisherbroyles.com) |
Subject: | U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 87741586 - SI - 2157.T130US1 |
Sent: | 4/20/2018 6:12:49 PM |
Sent As: | ECOM114@USPTO.GOV |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 Attachment - 5 Attachment - 6 Attachment - 7 Attachment - 8 Attachment - 9 Attachment - 10 Attachment - 11 Attachment - 12 Attachment - 13 Attachment - 14 Attachment - 15 Attachment - 16 Attachment - 17 Attachment - 18 Attachment - 19 Attachment - 20 Attachment - 21 Attachment - 22 Attachment - 23 Attachment - 24 Attachment - 25 Attachment - 26 Attachment - 27 Attachment - 28 Attachment - 29 Attachment - 30 Attachment - 31 Attachment - 32 Attachment - 33 Attachment - 34 Attachment - 35 |
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 87741586
MARK: SI
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: |
CLICK HERE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER: http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp
|
APPLICANT: NUVASIVE, INC.
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS: |
|
OFFICE ACTION
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: 4/20/2018
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.
Statutory Refusals
Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the marks in U.S. Registration Nos. 4731719, 4731720 and 5119646; 3883513 and 4611009; and 4176597. Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq. See the attached registrations.
There is a likelihood of confusion because applicant’s mark, SI, and registrant’s JCBD, LLC’s marks, SI-TECHNOLOGY; SI-DESIS and SI (stylized), are very similar; and the applicant’s goods, namely, “Medical software for measuring anatomical parameters, planning surgical procedures, and assessing surgical outcomes; medical apparatus in the nature of a medical workstation comprised primarily of computer hardware, software, LCD screen display, electronic nerve stimulators, optical cameras, and sensors for use in the fields of spinal cord and nerve detection and surveillance, surgical planning, and surgical navigation during surgical procedures including, robotic assisted surgery, and surgical procedures using robotic arms for surgical purposes”, move in the same trade channels as registrant’s goods, namely, “Orthopedic surgical implants made of artificial materials, namely, implants used to immobilize and fuse joints; orthopedic surgical implants made of artificial materials for surgical repair and stabilization of the spine and pelvis and attachments and components therefor”; “Orthopedic surgical implants made of artificial materials, namely, implants used to immobilize and fuse joints; orthopedic surgical implants made of artificial materials for surgical repair and stabilization of the spine and pelvis and attachments and components therefor” and “Orthopedic surgical implants comprising artificial material and attachments and components therefor; surgical and medical apparatus and instruments for use in performing surgery and sizing and placement of implants”, leading consumers to believe that applicant and registrant are related.
There is a likelihood of confusion because applicant’s mark, SI, and registrant’s SI-BONE, Inc.’s marks, SI-BONE and SI-BONE and design , are very similar; and the applicant’s goods, namely, “Medical software for measuring anatomical parameters, planning surgical procedures, and assessing surgical outcomes; medical apparatus in the nature of a medical workstation comprised primarily of computer hardware, software, LCD screen display, electronic nerve stimulators, optical cameras, and sensors for use in the fields of spinal cord and nerve detection and surveillance, surgical planning, and surgical navigation during surgical procedures including, robotic assisted surgery, and surgical procedures using robotic arms for surgical purposes”, move in the same trade channels as registrant’s goods, namely, “Orthopedic surgical implants, namely, rods used to immobilize and fuse joints” and “Orthopedic surgical implants comprising artificial materials, namely, rods to immobilize and fuse joints; medical and surgical instruments, namely, orthopedic instruments”, leading consumers to believe that applicant and registrant are related.
There is a likelihood of confusion because applicant’s mark, SI, and registrant’s Globus Medical Inc.’s mark, SI-LOK, are very similar; and the applicant’s goods, namely, “Medical software for measuring anatomical parameters, planning surgical procedures, and assessing surgical outcomes; medical apparatus in the nature of a medical workstation comprised primarily of computer hardware, software, LCD screen display, electronic nerve stimulators, optical cameras, and sensors for use in the fields of spinal cord and nerve detection and surveillance, surgical planning, and surgical navigation during surgical procedures including, robotic assisted surgery, and surgical procedures using robotic arms for surgical purposes”, move in the same trade channels as registrant’s goods, namely, “Spinal implants made from artificial materials for use in spine surgery”, leading consumers to believe that applicant and registrant are related.
In the present case, the lettering SI is the salient if only element in the marks since the other wording constitutes descriptive matter. And although SI is also deemed descriptive, 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, 120 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).
The goods at issue have complementary uses, and thus are often used together or otherwise purchased by the same purchasers for the same or related purposes, such goods have generally been found to be sufficiently related such that confusion would be likely if they are marketed under the same or similar marks. See for example the attachment from http://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=vlnaWryEIMil_QaZtqyIDg&q=spinal+surgery+goods&oq=spinal+surgery+goods&gs_l=psy-ab.3...1836.8465.0.8741.20.16.0.4.4.0.140.1379.14j2.16.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.19.1464...0j0i131k1j0i22i30k1.0.vywatEXIOSA showing a wide array of goods available to medical professionals in the field of spinal and orthopedic surgery. See In re Toshiba Med. Sys. Corp., 91 USPQ2d 1266, 1272 (TTAB 2009) (holding medical MRI diagnostic apparatus and medical ultrasound devices to be related, based in part on the fact that such goods have complementary purposes because they may be used by the same medical personnel on the same patients to treat the same disease).
Please note the following.
In response to this Office action, applicant may present arguments in support of registration by addressing the issue of the potential conflict between applicant’s mark and the marks in the referenced applications. Applicant’s election not to submit arguments at this time in no way limits applicant’s right to address this issue later if a refusal under Section 2(d) issues.
Please note the following additional refusal.
Registration is refused because the applied-for mark merely describes a feature and characteristic of applicant’s goods. Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); see TMEP §§1209.01(b), 1209.03 et seq.
Applicant’s mark is SI for Medical software for measuring anatomical parameters, planning surgical procedures, and assessing surgical outcomes; medical apparatus in the nature of a medical workstation comprised primarily of computer hardware, software, LCD screen display, electronic nerve stimulators, optical cameras, and sensors for use in the fields of spinal cord and nerve detection and surveillance, surgical planning, and surgical navigation during surgical procedures including, robotic assisted surgery, and surgical procedures using robotic arms for surgical purposes.
The attached evidence from AcronymFinder.com shows that the letters “SI” stand for “Sacroiliac Joint.” An abbreviation, initialism, or acronym is merely descriptive when it is generally understood as “substantially synonymous” with the descriptive words it represents. See In re Thomas Nelson, Inc., 97 USPQ2d 1712, 1715 (TTAB 2011) (citing Modern Optics, Inc. v. Univis Lens Co., 234 F.2d 504, 506, 110 USPQ 293, 295 (C.C.P.A. 1956)) (holding NKJV substantially synonymous with merely descriptive term “New King James Version” and thus merely descriptive of bibles); In re BetaBatt Inc., 89 USPQ2d 1152, 1155 (TTAB 2008) (holding DEC substantially synonymous with merely descriptive term “direct energy conversion” and thus merely descriptive of a type of batteries and battery related services); TMEP §1209.03(h). The attached evidence from http://www.spineuniverse.com/conditions/sacroiliac-joint-pain; http://zyga.com/ and http://neurosurgicalassociatespc.com/sacroiliitis/ confirms that the letters “SI” are a well-known acronym for the Sacroiliac Joint, which is “located in the pelvis, linking the iliac bone (pelvis) to the sacrum (lowest part of the spine above the tailbone).” The wording “Sacroiliac Joint” is merely descriptive of applicant’s goods, namely, that the orthopedic instruments are used for spinal surgery on the Sacroiliac Joint. The relevant consumer viewing applicant’s mark in connection with orthopedic instruments used in spinal surgery would recognize the letters “SI” as an acronym for the Sacroiliac Joint. Therefore, the acronym “SI” is merely descriptive of a use of applicant’s goods.
See also the attachment from http://www.spine-health.com/conditions/spine-anatomy/sacroiliac-joint-anatomy excerpted below:
The sacroiliac joint connects the sacrum (triangular bone at the bottom of the spine) with the pelvis (iliac bone that is part of the hip joint) on each side of the lower spine. It transmits all the forces of the upper body to the pelvis and legs. There is not a lot of motion in the joint and it is very strong and stable.
It is not clearly understood why sacroiliac joint dysfunction occurs, although some believe it is due to a limitation in its normal motion patterns and/or misalignment of the joint. Sacroiliac joint (SI joint) pain typically results in pain on one side very low in the back or in the buttocks. Another term for sacroiliac joint pain is sacroiliitis, a term that describes inflammation in the joint.
Applicant is also requested to state whether its goods will be used on the Sacroiliac Joint.
Factual information about the services must clearly indicate what the services are and how they are rendered, their salient features, and their prospective customers and channels of trade. Conclusory statements regarding the services will not satisfy this requirement for information.
Failure to comply with a request for information is grounds for refusing registration. In re Harley, 119 USPQ2d 1755, 1757-58 (TTAB 2016); TMEP §814. Merely stating that information about the services is available on applicant’s website is an insufficient response and will not make the relevant information of record. See In re Planalytics, 70 USPQ2d 1453, 1457-58 (TTAB 2004).
Identification
Applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate:
Class 9
Class 10
Medical apparatus in the nature of a medical workstation comprised primarily of computer hardware, software, LCD screen display, electronic nerve stimulators, optical cameras, and sensors for use in the fields of spinal cord and nerve detection and surveillance, surgical planning, and surgical navigation during surgical procedures including, robotic assisted surgery, and surgical procedures using robotic arms for surgical purposes
The application identifies goods 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 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). 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).
NOTE: Applicant has a companion application. Applicant is referred to TMEP Section 1402.08 for moving goods between companion applications.
See 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.
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.
Further action awaits response to the above.
/Raul Cordova/
Examining Attorney
Law Office 114
571-272-9448
Raul.Cordova@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.