To: | Thane IP Limited (nshabani@greenbergglusker.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88221332 - EMOP - 83876.00002 |
Sent: | August 09, 2019 02:04:07 PM |
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. 88221332
Mark: EMOP
|
|
Correspondence Address: Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman & Machti 1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2100
|
|
Applicant: Thane IP Limited
|
|
Reference/Docket No. 83876.00002
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). A link to the appropriate TEAS response form appears at the end of this Office action.
Issue date: August 09, 2019
This Office Action responds to applicant’s communication dated 07/18/2019 where applicant:
(1) Provided arguments against the Section 2(e)(1) Refusal; and
(2) Amended the identification of goods.
The examining attorney has reviewed the applicant’s response and determined the following:
(1) Applicant’s arguments have been reviewed but are not persuasive. Therefore, the Section 2(e)(1) Refusal is maintained and continued.
(2) Applicant’s amended identification of goods in Class 11 is accepted. However, the amended identification of goods in Classes 03, 07, and 09 are not accepted. The amended to the goods in International Class 007 remain indefinite and overly broad as to “apparatus for making cleaning preparations for household purposes” because the word “apparatus” does not make clear the specific type of good applicant offers and therefore, it is also unclear if the goods are properly classified. Additionally, the amendments to the identifications in Classes 03 and 09 are beyond the scope of the identification of goods in the original application. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(6), 2.71(a); TMEP §§805, 1402.06 et seq., 1402.07. Applicant’s goods may be clarified or limited, but may not be expanded beyond those originally itemized in the application or as acceptably amended. See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06. Therefore, the original identification in the application, and any previously accepted amendments, remain operative for purposes of future amendment. See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.07(d).
In this case, the application originally identified the goods in class 03 as “cleaner for fruits and vegetables” and in Class 09 as “electro-chemical activation equipment in the nature of electrolytic cells for use in treating various aqueous solutions for the production of nolyte and catholyte solution.”
However, the proposed amendment identifies the following goods in class 03 “liquid and spray cleaner for use on fruits, vegetables and other food items” and in class 09 “electro- chemical activation equipment in the nature of electrodes, namely anolyte and catholyte for use in treating various aqueous solutions.”
This portion of the proposed amendment is beyond the scope of the original identification in class 03 because the original identification limited the cleaner to only fruits and vegetables, however, the amended identification of goods broadens the limitation to “other food items”. Additionally, the proposed amendment is beyond the scope of the original identification in class 009 because the original identification limited the use of the electrolytic cells to “treating various aqueous solutions for the production of nolyte and catholyte solution”, however, the amended identification broadens the use to “treating various aqueous solutions.” Therefore, the amended identifications of goods in Classes 03 and 09 exceed the scope of the identification in the original application and thus, the original identifications remain operative.
Thus, the amended identification of goods in class 11 is accepted and the identification of goods requirement for classes 03, 07, and 09 is maintained and continued.
(3) Bar information and an attestation of good standing are required from the applicant’s Attorney of record. Therefore, the new Attorney Bar Information Requirement must issue below.
SUMMARY OF ISSUES:
· Attorney Bar Information Required
ATTORNEY BAR INFORMATION REQUIRED
RESPONSE GUIDELINES
For this application to proceed, applicant must explicitly address each refusal and requirement in this Office action. For a refusal, applicant may provide written arguments and evidence against the refusal, and may have other response options if specified above. For a requirement, applicant should set forth the changes or statements. Please see “Responding to Office Actions” and the informational video “Response to Office Action” for more information and tips on responding.
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.
How to respond. Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action
/Rebecca D. Coughlan/
Rebecca D. Coughlan
Examining Attorney
Law Office 113
(571)272-4975
rebecca.coughlan@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE