To: | HANGZHOU INSHOT TECH CO.,LTD (realmark.uk@outlook.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88175599 - P - N/A |
Sent: | July 23, 2019 07:02:14 AM |
Sent As: | ecom113@uspto.gov |
Attachments: |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88175599
Mark: P
|
|
Correspondence Address: |
|
Applicant: HANGZHOU INSHOT TECH CO.,LTD
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N/A
Correspondence Email Address: |
|
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: July 23, 2019
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.
Introduction
Requirement for Amended Mark Description
Requirement for Additional Specimens
The applicant has resubmitted the same mark description submitted in the initial application. Therefore, the mark description requirement is maintained and made final. The applicant has partially obviated the specimen requirement by deleting some of its goods. The applicant has submitted additional specimens; however, because they show use of the mark for the same goods as in the initial application, the specimen requirement is maintained and made final as to specific goods for the reasons discussed below.
Summary of Issues Applicant Must Address
FINAL Mark Description Requirement
The mark is in color and the application included the following color claim and mark description:
The color(s) red, white and gray is/are claimed as a feature of the mark.
The mark consists of a red background square with a white and gray gradient solid circle inside, on the lower left side of the circle is a vertical bar likes a tail.
This description is inconsistent with the mark on the drawing and thus is inaccurate. 37 C.F.R. §2.37; see TMEP §§808.01, 808.02. Descriptions must be accurate and identify only those literal and design elements appearing in the mark. See 37 C.F.R. §2.37; TMEP §§808.02, 808.03(d). In this case, the element described in the current mark description as a circle with a tail would be perceived as a letter P, especially as used on the specimen. Therefore, the mark description requirement is maintained and made final.
The following description is suggested, if accurate:
The mark consists of a red square containing a white and gray stylized “P”.
FINAL Specimen Requirement – As to Specific Goods
This requirement is limited to the “Computer game programs.”
Applicant applied for a multitude of goods in International Class 9. Note that if an identification is so broad that it encompasses a wide range of products and services, the applicant must submit evidence that it actually uses the mark on a wide range of products and services to obtain registration. See In re Air Products & Chemicals, Inc., 192 USPQ 84, recon. denied 192 USPQ 157 (TTAB 1976); 37 CFR §2.61(b); TMEP §§904.01(a) and 1402.03.
Therefore, the applicant was required to submit a proper specimen for eight groups of goods. The applicant has deleted all of the goods in this requirement except “Computer game programs.” The applicant has submitted additional specimens; however, they either don’t associate the mark with any particular software, or they associate the mark with photo editing software. Therefore, they are not acceptable to show use of the mark for “Computer game programs.” Accordingly, the specimen requirement is maintained and made final as to these goods.
If applicant cannot submit proper specimens for the goods subject to this requirement, applicant may amend the filing basis to intent to use under Section 1(b), for which no specimen is required. This option will later necessitate additional fee(s) and filing requirements such as providing a specimen. For an overview of this response option and instructions on how to satisfy this option online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, please go to http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/law/specimen.jsp.
The applicant may also delete these goods if they are not yet in use in commerce. “Use in commerce” means (1) a bona fide use of the applied-for mark in the ordinary course of trade (and not merely to reserve a right in the mark), (2) the mark is placed in any manner on the goods, packaging, tags or labels, or displays of the goods, and (3) the goods are actually sold or transported in commerce. See 15 U.S.C. §1127.
ADVISORY – U.S. Counsel Rules Change
On August 3, 2019, changes to the federal trademark regulations will become effective that require trademark applicants, registrants, and parties to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board proceedings who are foreign-domiciled (have a permanent legal residence or a principal place of business outside of the United States), including Canadian filers, to have an attorney who is licensed to practice law in the United States represent them at the USPTO. In addition, U.S.-licensed attorneys representing a trademark applicant, registrant, or party will generally be required to provide their bar membership information, a statement attesting to their good standing in that bar, and their postal/email addresses in trademark-related submissions. All U.S.-licensed attorneys who practice before the USPTO are subject to the rules in 37 C.F.R. Part 11 governing representation of others, including the USPTO’s Rules of Professional Conduct.
These changes are being made to increase customer compliance with federal trademark law, improve the accuracy of trademark submissions to the USPTO, and safeguard the integrity of the U.S. trademark register. See the U.S. Counsel Rule change webpage for more information.
Response Options
(1) a response filed using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) that fully satisfies all outstanding requirements and/or resolves all outstanding refusals; and/or
(2) an appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board filed using the Electronic System for Trademark Trials and Appeals (ESTTA) with the required filing fee of $200 per class.
37 C.F.R. §2.63(b)(1)-(2); TMEP §714.04; see 37 C.F.R. §2.6(a)(18); TBMP ch. 1200.
In certain rare circumstances, an applicant may respond by filing a petition to the Director pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b)(2) to review procedural issues. TMEP §714.04; see 37 C.F.R. §2.146(b); TBMP §1201.05; TMEP §1704 (explaining petitionable matters). There is a fee required for filing a petition. 37 C.F.R. §2.6(a)(15).
How to respond. Click to file a response to this final Office action and/or appeal it to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB).
/Kim Teresa Moninghoff/
Examining Attorney
Law Office 113
Phone: 571-272-4738
Email: kim.moninghoff@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE