NOTE TO THE FILE
SERIAL NUMBER: 88131661
DATE: 07/17/2019
NAME: canderson
NOTE:
Searched:
Lexis/Nexis
OneLook
Wikipedia
Acronym Finder Protest evidence reviewed
Other:Checked:
Geographic significance
Surname
Translation
ID with ID/CLASS mailboxChecked list of approved Canadian attorneys and agents
Discussed file with
Attorney/Applicant via:
phone Left message with
X email Attorney/ApplicantRequested Law Library search X Issued Examiner’s Amendment
for: and entered changes in TRADEUPSPRINT 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
X Changed TRADEUPS to: amend ID
From: Sean Sweeney [mailto:sean@tredecimlaw.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 11:12 AM
To: Anderson, Cassondra <Cassondra.Anderson@USPTO.GOV>
Cc: trademark@tredecimlaw.com
Subject: Re: US Trademark Application Serial No. 88131661 and 88131677
Dear Examiner Anderson,
Thank you for the email below. After conferring with our client, I can confirm that the relevant goods include both "children's electronic ride-on toy vehicles” and "children's non-electronic ride-on toy vehicles.”
It is our belief that the current recitation of simply “Children’s ride-on toy vehicles” is an accurate description of the relevant goods since this description includes both the electronic and the non-electronic goods. However, we would not object if you prefer to enter an examiner’s amendment separately reciting both electronic and non-electronic children’s ride-on toy vehicles. For purposes of clarity, we understand that your proposed examiner’s amendment regarding the class 28 goods would read as follows:
Class 28: Games and playthings, namely, ride on toys, Building blocks as toys, Play balloons, Dominoes, Dolls, Scooters as toys, Stuffed toys, Toy models, Smart toys, namely, electronic learning toys and electric action toys, Toy watches, gymnastic and sporting articles, namely, Billiard balls, Billiard table cushions, Knee guards for athletic use; Elbow guards for athletic use; decorations for Christmas trees; toy tricycles for children; toy scooters; children’s electronic ride-on toy vehicles; children’s non-electronic ride-on toy vehicles
It is our understanding that this amendment would be entered in both Application no. 88131661 and Application no. 88131677.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you believe it would be beneficial to discuss this matter prior to entering an examiner's amendment.
Best,
Sean Sweeney
Tredecim LLC
This email was sent by an attorney at the law firm Tredecim, LLC (http://tredec.im). It may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If you suspect that you were not intended to receive this email, please delete it and notify us as soon as possible. Mis-transmission of this email does not constitute any waiver of privilege. Thank you.
On July 11, 2019 at 6:51:25 AM, Anderson, Cassondra (cassondra.anderson@uspto.gov) wrote:
Dear Sean,
I am the assigned trademark examining attorney for the above-referenced application(s). I have reviewed the responses, and will lift the 2(d) refusal for ‘661. However, the identification of goods and/or services in both applications need one modification. The wording “children's ride-on toy vehicles” needs to indicate if the goods are electronic or non-electronic. I apologize for missing this the first time.
Please let me know by COB Monday, July 15 which you prefer, and if you agree to allow me to correct the above by an examiner's amendment or if you have any questions about the applications.
Best,
Cassie Anderson
Examining Attorney
Law Office 103
(571) 272-5595