To: | Luck Stone Corporation (trademarks@troutmansanders.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88103181 - QUICKHAUL - 201015.0231 |
Sent: | January 23, 2020 10:18:19 AM |
Sent As: | ecom117@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 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88103181
Mark: QUICKHAUL
|
|
Correspondence Address: 600 PEACHTREE STREET, NE, SUITE 3000
|
|
Applicant: Luck Stone Corporation
|
|
Reference/Docket No. 201015.0231
Correspondence Email Address: |
|
FINAL OFFICE ACTION
The USPTO must receive applicant’s response to this letter within six months of the issue date below or the application will be abandoned. Respond using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) and/or Electronic System for Trademark Trials and Appeals (ESTTA). A link to the appropriate TEAS response form and/or to ESTTA for an appeal appears at the end of this Office action.
Issue date: January 23, 2020
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.
This Office action is in response to applicant’s communication filed on December 27, 2019. The amendment to limit the identification of goods is acceptable.
The examining attorney has reviewed the applicant’s response and found the arguments unpersuasive. Thus the refusal is maintained and made FINAL.
Likelihood of Confusion
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 Inn at St. John’s, LLC, 126 USPQ2d 1742, 1746 (TTAB 2018) (citing In re Davia, 110 USPQ2d 1810, 1812 (TTAB 2014)); TMEP §1207.01(b).
Applicant seeks to register the mark QUICKHAUL for use with “mobile application software for use by haulers to select and view delivery assignments, select and view delivery and earning histories, navigate delivery routes, capture delivery receipt signatures, and dispatch messages” and “providing non-downloadable software as a service (SaaS) for use by haulers to select and view delivery assignments, select and view delivery and earning histories, navigate delivery routes, capture delivery receipt signatures, and dispatch messages”.
The Registrant owns the mark QUIKHAUL for use with “Junk removal; Junk, trash and debris removal; Moving company services; Moving van services; Trucking services, namely, hauling of furniture, junk, debris, boxes, and personal items; Furniture moving; Truck hauling”.
The examining attorney maintains that the applicant’s mark QUICKHAUL looks and sounds like the registrant’s mark QUIKHAUL. The applicant does not dispute the similarity of the marks.
Because the marks are phonetically equivalent, the marks are on the whole confusingly similar and impart a similar commercial impression.
In the second step of the analysis, the examining attorney finds that the applicant’s goods and the registrant’s goods are related. The applicant has limited it goods to mobile application software for haulers and services for non-downloadable software for haulers. The attached website shows that the applicant is a quarry company, that also provides a mobile application for contracted haulers to “digitally track their tickets, orders, mileage and more.”
Based on the registrant’s identification and its website which is attached, the registrant provides “truck hauling” and could be contracted to provide and track the same hauling services that the applicant provides.
Because the marks are phonetically equivalent and the applicant’s goods and services and the registrant’s services can originate from the same source, the examining attorney refuses registration of the mark under Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act. Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.
This refusal is FINAL.
How to respond. Click to file a request for reconsideration of this final Office action that fully resolves all outstanding requirements and refusals and/or click to file a timely appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) with the required filing fee(s).
/D. Beryl Gardner/
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 117
571-272-9162 (O)
571-273-9162 (F)
beryl.gardner@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE