To: | The Great Lakes Brewing Co. (skoenig@faysharpe.com) |
Subject: | U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 88208716 - GREAT LAKES BREWING CO HOP COLLEGE - GLBZ 500186U |
Sent: | 1/14/2019 4:03:09 PM |
Sent As: | ECOM109@USPTO.GOV |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 Attachment - 5 Attachment - 6 Attachment - 7 |
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 88208716
MARK: GREAT LAKES BREWING CO HOP COLLEGE
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: |
CLICK HERE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER: http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp
|
APPLICANT: The Great Lakes Brewing Co.
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS: |
|
PRIORITY 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: 1/14/2019
DATABASE SEARCH: The trademark examining attorney has searched the USPTO’s database of registered and pending marks and has found no conflicting marks that would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d). TMEP §704.02; see 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).
ISSUES APPLICANT MUST ADDRESS: On January 14, 2019, the trademark examining attorney and Sandra Koenig discussed the issues below. Applicant must timely respond to these issues. See 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §2.62(a); TMEP §§708, 711.
In this case, applicant must disclaim the wording all the wording in the mark because it is not inherently distinctive. These unregistrable term(s) are at best merely descriptive and primarily geographically descriptive of applicant’s services.
The nondistinctive wording “BREWING CO HOP COLLEGE” and “EST. 2018” merely describes an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose, or use of applicant’s services. See 15 U.S.C. §§1052(e)(1); DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd., 695 F.3d 1247, 1251, 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1755 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
The term BREW is defined as “To make (ale or beer) from malt and hops by infusion, boiling, and fermentation” (see attached). The letters CO are an abbreviation for COMPANY which is defined as “an organization that provides services, or that makes or sells goods for money” (see attached). The term HOP is defined as “The dried female inflorescences of this plant, containing a bitter aromatic oil. They are used in brewing to inhibit bacterial growth and to add the characteristic bitter taste to beer” (see attached). The term COLLEGE is defined as “A school offering special instruction in a professional or technical subject” (see attached).
Applicant is a BREWING COMPANY that provides a COLLEGE offering special instruction in the technical subject of beer and beer production. Presumably, the subject matter of the classes, seminars and workshops related to HOPS and its role in beer and beer production. Accordingly, the term HOPS merely describes the subject matter of the services.
The term COLLEGE is merely generic for the provider of the services. Terms that identify the provider of a service may be generic of the service. See In re Wm. B. Coleman Co., 93 USPQ2d 2019, 2025 (TTAB 2010) (holding ELECTRIC CANDLE COMPANY generic for lighting fixtures); In re The Paint Prods. Co., 8 USPQ2d 1863, 1865 (TTAB 1988) (holding PAINT PRODUCTS CO. generic for paint); In re E. I. Kane, Inc., 221 USPQ 1203, 1205 (TTAB 1984) (holding OFFICE MOVERS, INC. generic for moving services); TMEP §1209.03(q).
In this case, applicant must disclaim the wording “EST. 2018” because it is not inherently distinctive. These unregistrable term(s) at best are merely informational about the services and are commonly used in business; thus the term(s) do not function as a mark. See 15 U.S.C. §§1051-1053, 1127; In re Boston Beer Co., 198 F.3d 1370, 1372-74, 53 USPQ2d 1056, 1058-59 (Fed. Cir. 1999); In re Aerospace Optics, Inc., 78 USPQ2d 1861, 1864 (TTAB 2006); TMEP §§807.14(a), 1202.04, 1213.03(a), (b).
Determining whether a term functions as a service mark depends on how such matter would be perceived by the relevant public. In re Eagle Crest, Inc., 96 USPQ2d 1227, 1229 (TTAB 2010); In re Aerospace Optics, Inc., 78 USPQ2d at 1862; TMEP §1202.04. “The more commonly a [term] is used, the less likely that the public will use it to identify only one source and the less likely that it will be recognized by purchasers as a trademark [or service mark].” In re Hulting, 107 USPQ2d 1175, 1177 (TTAB 2013) (quoting In re Eagle Crest, Inc., 96 USPQ2d at 1229); TMEP §1202.04.
The wording EST. plus a specific year is commonly used by businesses to indicate when a business was ESTABLISHED or started. Because consumers are accustomed to seeing this term commonly used by many businesses to impart information to consumers, they will perceive this term or slogan only as informational matter rather than as a service mark that identifies the source of applicant’s services.
In addition, the nondistinctive wording “GREAT LAKES” is primarily geographically descriptive of the origin of applicant’s services. See 15 U.S.C. §§1052(e)(2); In re Societe Generale des Eaux Minerales de Vittel S.A., 824 F.2d 957, 959, 3 USPQ2d 1450, 1451-52 (Fed. Cir. 1987); TMEP §§1210.01(a), 1210.06(a), 1213.03(a).
The attached evidence from Wikipedia shows that GREAT LAKES is a generally known geographic place or location. See TMEP §§1210.02 et seq. The services for which applicant seeks registration originate in this geographic place or location as shown by applicant’s address. See TMEP §1210.03. Because the services originate in this place or location, a public association of the services with the place is presumed. See In re Hollywood Lawyers Online, 110 USPQ2d 1852, 1858 (TTAB 2014) (citing In re Spirits of New Merced, LLC, 85 USPQ2d 1614, 1621 (TTAB 2007)); TMEP §§1210.02(a) 1210.04.
Applicant may respond to this issue by submitting a disclaimer in the following format:
No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “GREAT LAKES BREWING CO HOP COLLEGE” and “EST. 2018” apart from the mark as shown.
For an overview of disclaimers and instructions on how to satisfy this issue using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), see the Disclaimer webpage.
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.
/Christina Sobral/
Christina Sobral
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 109
Christina.Sobral@uspto.gov
571.272.5703
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.