Notation to File

CORVUS ENERGY

Corvus Energy, Inc.

RE: U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 88212884 - CORVUS ENERGY - Atty Dock. No. 9925.0002   Dear Mr. Schlegelmilch,   Thank you for your message.  Our client confirms that it wishes to maintain the section 44(d) priority claim for class 42 and does NOT wish to rely on section 44(e) as a basis for registration.  Please proceed accordingly and advise if you have any questions or concerns.   Kind regards, Susan Susan D. Pitchford Tel: 503-227-5631 Fax: 503-228-4373 111 SW Columbia Street, Ste. 725, Portland, OR 97201 USA Email: sdp@chernofflaw.com

NOTE TO THE FILE


SERIAL NUMBER:            88212884

DATE:                                04/23/2019

NAME:                               jschlegelmilch

NOTE:         

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

     Requested Law Library search       X   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:

From: Susan Pitchford [mailto:sdp@chernofflaw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2019 2:29 PM
To: Schlegelmilch, Jonathon <Jonathon.Schlegelmilch@USPTO.GOV>
Cc: SDP Docketing <SDP.Docket@CVMS.hostpilot.com>
Subject: RE: U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 88212884 - CORVUS ENERGY - Atty Dock. No. 9925.0002

 

Dear Mr. Schlegelmilch,

 

Thank you for your message.  Our client confirms that it wishes to maintain the section 44(d) priority claim for class 42 and does NOT wish to rely on section 44(e) as a basis for registration.  Please proceed accordingly and advise if you have any questions or concerns.

 

Kind regards,

Susan

Susan D. Pitchford

Tel: 503-227-5631 Fax: 503-228-4373

111 SW Columbia Street, Ste. 725, Portland, OR 97201 USA

Email: sdp@chernofflaw.com

 

       

 

This e-mail is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and contains information belonging to Chernoff

Vilhauer LLP which is confidential and/or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are

hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the contents

of this e-mail information is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify

the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.

 

 

 

From: Schlegelmilch, Jonathon <Jonathon.Schlegelmilch@USPTO.GOV>
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2019 5:02 AM
To: Susan Pitchford <
sdp@chernofflaw.com>; SDP Docketing <SDP.Docket@CVMS.hostpilot.com>
Subject: U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 88212884 - CORVUS ENERGY - Atty Dock. No. 9925.0002

 

Dear Ms. Pitchford,

 

I received applicant’s response for “CORVUS ENERGY” dated April 19, 2019, and the application now appears to be mostly in order.  However, before I can approve the mark for publication, the there is still a remaining issue that must be resolved.  Upon applicant’s direction and consent, I can handle this on my end via Examiner’s Amendment to expedite the process.

 

Previously, in the preliminary amendment, applicant indicated that it does not intend to rely on 44(e) as a basis for registration (relying on 44(d) as a claim of priority for Class 42, and 1(b) for all five classes, but not 44(e) for any Class).  In applicant’s comments in the April 19 response, applicant expresses the understanding that the application is now in position for publication.  However, also in the April 19 response, applicant notes that applicant would now like to rely on Section 44(e) for Class 42.  If it is true that applicant would now like to rely on Section 44(e) for Class 42, I will send out another Office action addressing it (suspension will be required until applicant provides a copy of the foreign registration).  However, if this was a clerical error and applicant intends to rely on 44(d), but not 44(e), I will make the necessary notes on the file and approve the application for publication.

 

Please advise, and let me know if you have any questions.

 

Respectfully,

 

/Jonathon A. Schlegelmilch/

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 108

Phone: (571) 272-7758

jonathon.schlegelmilch@uspto.gov

 


uspto.report is an independent third-party trademark research tool that is not affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or any other governmental organization. The information provided by uspto.report is based on publicly available data at the time of writing and is intended for informational purposes only.

While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information displayed on this site. The use of this site is at your own risk. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

All official trademark data, including owner information, should be verified by visiting the official USPTO website at www.uspto.gov. This site is not intended to replace professional legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for consulting with a legal professional who is knowledgeable about trademark law.

© 2024 USPTO.report | Privacy Policy | Resources | RSS Feed of Trademarks | Trademark Filings Twitter Feed