Notation to File

NOTE TO THE FILE

SERIAL NUMBER:            88123480

DATE:                                07/09/2019

NAME:                               gulrich

NOTE:         

Searched:                                                             
     Google                            
     Lexis/Nexis                       
     OneLook
     Wikipedia
     Acronym Finder                         Protest evidence reviewed
     Other:

Checked:                                                             
     Geographic significance          
     Surname                          
     Translation
     ID with ID/CLASS mailbox

     Checked list of approved Canadian attorneys and agents

Discussed file with
Attorney/Applicant via:
        phone                               Left message with
    X   email                               Attorney/Applicant

     Requested Law Library search           Issued Examiner’s Amendment
     for:                                   and entered changes in TRADEUPS

        PRINT        DO NOT PRINT           Added design code in TRADEUPS
     Description of the mark
     Translation statement                  Re-imaged standard character
                                            drawing
     Negative translation statement             
     Consent of living individual           Contacted TM MADRID ID/CLASS
                                            about misclassified definite ID
     Changed TRADEUPS to:

     OTHER:

Dear Mr. Neale:

 

Unfortunately, trademark examining attorneys do not have the authority to grant extensions to the response period:  “The statutory period for response to an examining attorney’s Office action is six months from the Office action's date of issuance.  15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §2.62(a).  The examining attorney has no discretion to shorten or extend this period.” TMEP §711.

 

As I have noted in the past two emails, “there are no amendments to the identification of goods that I can offer that would overcome this refusal.  Therefore, at this point you are welcome to formally submit arguments against the refusal and in favor of registration. If you wish to have any arguments against a substantive refusal considered, they must be filed via a formal response. See, TMEP §709.05.”

 

Additionally, please note that “[i]nformal communications may not be used to request advisory opinions as to the likelihood of overcoming a substantive refusal.” TMEP §709.05.

 

Further, please note that “USPTO employees cannot give advice on trademark law.  It is inappropriate for USPTO personnel to give legal advice, to act as a counselor for individuals, or to recommend a qualified practitioner” and that no USPTO attorney or staff is permitted to give an applicant legal advice or statements about an applicant’s legal rights.  TMEP §§705.02, 709.06. 

 

 

 

Kind Regards,

 

N. Gretchen Ulrich 

Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 113

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

T: 571.272.1951 | gretchen.ulrich@uspto.gov

 

 

 

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

 

 

 

From: Peter Neale [mailto:pneale333@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2019 3:24 PM
To: Ulrich, Gretchen <gretchen.ulrich@USPTO.GOV>
Subject: Re: Trademark Application "EXS" Serial No. 88123480

 

Hi Gretchen,  

 

We've struggled to figure out a way to make this trademark work. We have tried to accomplish this within the 6 months that you gave us. 

 

I am now ready to pay an attorney an expensive fee to get this trademark to be accepted. And/or make changes that will fit your guidelines. 

 

Personally, I do not think that our company's name and product's name"EXS" herbal spray is possible to confuse with the XS protein shake that you listed most as potential conflicts. But I respect your expertise.

 

Can you give us another 3 months extension please? I paid legalzoom $575 to do this and I dont want to lose that money.

 

Can you do this for us? And can you advise on any changes I can make to make ours unique and not conflict with any other existing trademarks.