Offc Action Outgoing

STO-N-GO

With-U E-Commerce (Shanghai) Co.

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88218424 - STO-N-GO - withUtm1218a

To: With-U E-Commerce (Shanghai) Co. (john@rosspatent.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88218424 - STO-N-GO - withUtm1218a
Sent: September 08, 2020 02:12:22 PM
Sent As: ecom112@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application

 

U.S. Application Serial No. 88218424

 

Mark:  STO-N-GO

 

 

 

 

Correspondence Address: 

John R. Ross, III

ROSS PATENT LAW OFFICE

P.O. BOX 2138

DEL MAR, CA 92014

 

 

 

Applicant:  With-U E-Commerce (Shanghai) Co.

 

 

 

Reference/Docket No. withUtm1218a

 

Correspondence Email Address: 

 john@rosspatent.com

 

 

 

FINAL OFFICE ACTION

 

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:  September 08, 2020

 

INTRODUCTION

 

This Office action is in response to applicant’s communication filed on July 14, 2020.

 

In a previous Office action(s) dated January 15, 2020, the trademark examining attorney refused registration of the applied-for mark based on the following: failure to function as a trademark; mark on specimen differs from drawing.

 

Based on applicant’s response, the trademark examining attorney maintains and now makes FINAL both refusals, as summarized below.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b); TMEP §714.04.

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES MADE FINAL that applicant must address:

 

  • Specimen refusal -- Failure to function as a trademark.
  • Specimen refusal -- Mark on specimen differs from the drawing.

 

SPECIMEN REFUSAL – Failure to function as a mark.

Registration is refused because the applied-for mark, as used on the specimen of record, does not function as a trademark to indicate the source of applicant’s goods and to identify and distinguish them from others.  Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051-1052, 1127; see In re Phoseon Tech., Inc., 103 USPQ2d 1822, 1827-28 (TTAB 2012); In re Remington Prods., Inc., 3 USPQ2d 1714, 1715 (TTAB 1987); TMEP §§904.07(b); 1202 et seq.

 

The applied-for mark, as shown on the specimen, does not function as a trademark because it is not displayed in such a manner that would indicate the source of the goods. Rather, the applied-for mark is displayed below one of several photographs demonstrating characteristics, features, or functions of the underlying goods, neither of which services to identify the source of the goods.

 

Whether a designation functions as a mark depends on the commercial impression it makes on the relevant public; that is, whether purchasers would be likely to regard it as a source-indicator for the goods.  See In re Keep A Breast Found., 123 USPQ2d 1869, 1879 (TTAB 2017) (quoting In re Eagle Crest Inc., 96 USPQ2d 1227, 1229 (TTAB 2010)); TMEP §1202.  The specimen and any other relevant evidence of use is reviewed to determine whether an applied-for mark is being used as a trademark.  In re Bose Corp., 546 F.2d 893, 897, 192 USPQ 213, 216 (C.C.P.A. 1976); In re Volvo Cars of N. Am., Inc., 46 USPQ2d 1455, 1459 (TTAB 1998). 

 

Not every designation that appears on a product or its packaging functions as a trademark, even though it may have been adopted with the intent to do so.  See In re Peace Love World Live, LLC, 127 USPQ2d 1400, 1404 (TTAB 2018) (citing In re Pro-Line Corp., 28 USPQ2d 1141, 1142 (TTAB 1993)).  A designation can only be registered when purchasers would be likely to regard it as a source-indicator for the goods.  See In re Manco, Inc., 24 USPQ2d 1938, 1941 (TTAB 1992) (citing In re Remington Prods. Inc., 3 USPQ2d 1714, 1715 (TTAB 1987)); TMEP §1202.

 

Response option.  Applicant may respond to this refusal by submitting a different specimen (a verified “substitute” specimen) that (a) was in actual use in commerce prior to the expiration of the deadline for filing the statement of use and (b) shows proper trademark use for the goods in the statement of use.  A “verified substitute specimen” is a specimen that is accompanied by the following statement made in a signed affidavit or supported by a declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20:  “The substitute (or new, or originally submitted, if appropriate) specimen(s) was/were in use in commerce prior to expiration of the filing deadline for filing a statement of use.”  The substitute specimen cannot be accepted without this statement.

 

Examples of specimens.  Specimens for goods include a photograph of (1) the actual goods bearing the mark; (2) an actual container, packaging, tag or label for the goods bearing the mark; or (3) a point-of-sale display showing the mark directly associated with the goods.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(1), (c); TMEP §904.03(a)-(m).  A webpage specimen submitted as a display associated with the goods must show the mark in association with a picture or textual description of the goods and include information necessary for ordering the goods.  TMEP §904.03(i); see 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(1), (c).  Any webpage printout or screenshot submitted as a specimen must include the webpage’s URL and the date it was accessed or printed.  37 C.F.R. §2.56(c).

 

Applicant may not withdraw the statement of use.  37 C.F.R. §2.88(f); TMEP §1109.17.

 

For more information about this response option and instructions on how to submit a different specimen using the online Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Specimen webpage.

 

SPECIMEN REFUSAL - Mark shown on drawing does not match mark on specimen.  Registration is refused because the specimen does not show the mark in the drawing in use in commerce, which is required in the statement of use.  Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a), 1301.04(g)(i).  The mark appearing on the specimen and in the drawing must match; that is, the mark in the drawing “must be a substantially exact representation of the mark” on the specimen.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.51(a)-(b); TMEP §807.12(a).

 

In this case, the specimen displays the mark as EASY STO-N-GO CASE.  However, the drawing displays the mark as STO-N-GO. The mark on the specimen does not match the mark in the drawing because the addition of the wording “easy” and “case” results in a mark different from that which the applicant seeks registration.  Applicant has thus failed to provide the required evidence of use of the mark in commerce.  See TMEP §807.12(a).

 

Response option.  Applicant may respond to this refusal by submitting a different specimen (a verified “substitute” specimen) that (a) shows the mark in the drawing in actual use in commerce for the goods and/or services in the statement of use, and (b) was in actual use in commerce prior to the expiration of the deadline for filing the statement of use. 

 

Examples of specimens.  Specimens for goods include a photograph of (1) the actual goods bearing the mark; (2) an actual container, packaging, tag or label for the goods bearing the mark; or (3) a point-of-sale display showing the mark directly associated with the goods.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(1), (c); TMEP §904.03(a)-(m).  A webpage specimen submitted as a display associated with the goods must show the mark in association with a picture or textual description of the goods and include information necessary for ordering the goods.  TMEP §904.03(i); see 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(1), (c). 

 

Any web page printout or screenshot submitted as a specimen, whether for goods or services, must include the webpage’s URL and the date it was accessed or printed.  37 C.F.R. §2.56(c).

 

The USPTO will not accept an amended drawing submitted in response to this refusal because the changes would materially alter the drawing of the mark in the original application or as previously acceptably amended.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.72(a)-(b); TMEP §807.14.  Specifically, amending the mark on the drawing to agree with the mark on the specimen would be a material alteration because the addition of the wording “easy” and “case” to the mark would substantially alter the commercial impression of the mark and would require a new search of the Office records for potentially confusing marks.

 

In addition, applicant may not respond by withdrawing the statement of use.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.88(f); TMEP §1109.17.

 

For more information about drawings and instructions on how to satisfy this response option using the online Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Drawing webpage.

 

How to respond.  Click to file a request for reconsideration of this final Office action that fully resolves all outstanding requirements and refusals and/or click to file a timely appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) with the required filing fee(s).

 

 

 

/David Taylor/

David Taylor

Examining Attorney

Law Office 112

571-272-9420

David.Taylor2@uspto.gov

 

 

RESPONSE GUIDANCE

 

  • Missing the response deadline to this letter will cause the application to abandon.  A response or notice of appeal must be received by the USPTO before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  TEAS and ESTTA maintenance or unforeseen circumstances could affect an applicant’s ability to timely respond.  

 

 

 

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88218424 - STO-N-GO - withUtm1218a

To: With-U E-Commerce (Shanghai) Co. (john@rosspatent.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88218424 - STO-N-GO - withUtm1218a
Sent: September 08, 2020 02:12:22 PM
Sent As: ecom112@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on September 08, 2020 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88218424

 

Your trademark application has been reviewed by a trademark examining attorney.  As part of that review, the assigned attorney has issued an official letter that you must respond to by the specified deadline or your application will be abandoned.  Please follow the steps below.

 

(1)  Read the official letter.

 

(2)  Direct questions about the contents of the Office action to the assigned attorney below. 

 

 

/David Taylor/

David Taylor

Examining Attorney

Law Office 112

571-272-9420

David.Taylor2@uspto.gov

 

Direct questions about navigating USPTO electronic forms, the USPTO website, the application process, the status of your application, and/or whether there are outstanding deadlines or documents related to your file to the Trademark Assistance Center (TAC).

 

(3)  Respond within 6 months (or earlier, if required in the Office action) from September 08, 2020, using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS).  The response must be received by the USPTO before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  See the Office action for more information about how to respond

 

 

 

GENERAL GUIDANCE

·       Check the status of your application periodically in the Trademark Status & Document Retrieval (TSDR) database to avoid missing critical deadlines.

 

·       Update your correspondence email address, if needed, to ensure you receive important USPTO notices about your application.

 

·       Beware of misleading notices sent by private companies about your application.  Private companies not associated with the USPTO use public information available in trademark registrations to mail and email trademark-related offers and notices – most of which require fees.  All official USPTO correspondence will only be emailed from the domain “@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