Offc Action Outgoing

Trademark

TXS Industrial Design, Inc.

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88221519 - 4684-02500

To: TXS Industrial Design, Inc. (dallastrademarks@dfw.conleyrose.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88221519 - 4684-02500
Sent: July 09, 2019 12:30:06 PM
Sent As: ecom108@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

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

 

U.S. Application Serial No. 88221519

 

Mark:  

 

 

 

 

Correspondence Address: 

DARLENE F. GHAVIMI

CONLEY ROSE, P.C.

5601 GRANITE PARKWAY, SUITE 500

PLANO, TX 75024

 

 

 

Applicant:  TXS Industrial Design, Inc.

 

 

 

Reference/Docket No. 4684-02500

 

Correspondence Email Address: 

 dallastrademarks@dfw.conleyrose.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:  July 09, 2019

 

INTRODUCTION

 

This Office action is in response to applicant’s communication filed on June 10, 2019.

 

In a previous Office action dated March 18, 2019, the trademark examining attorney refused registration of the applied-for mark based on the following:  Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, and 45 Refusal for a non-distinctive product design. In addition, Applicant was required to amend the drawing and mark description, provide information regarding the goods, and amend the identification of goods.

 

Based on applicant’s response, the trademark examining attorney notes that the following requirements have been satisfied: Applicant has provided the requested information regarding the goods and has acceptably amended the identification of goods.  See TMEP §§713.02, 714.04. 

 

The following refusal has also been obviated: Applicant has provided a sufficient Section 2(f) claim in response to the Sections 1, 2, and 45 Refusal.  See TMEP §§713.02, 714.04. 

 

However, the amended drawing contains an additional two dotted lines which are not accounted for in the mark description.

 

As a result, the trademark examining attorney maintains and now makes FINAL the refusal(s) and/or requirement(s) in the summary of issues below.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b); TMEP §714.04.

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES MADE FINAL that applicant must address:

  • Amended Drawing and Mark Description Required

 

AMENDED DRAWING AND MARK DESCRIPTION REQUIRED

 

For marks consisting of a configuration of the goods or their packaging or a specific design feature of the goods or packaging, the drawing must depict a single three-dimensional view of the goods or packaging, showing in solid lines those features that applicant claims as its mark.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.52(b)(2); TMEP §§807.10, 1202.02(c)(iv); In re Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co., 335 F.2d 836, 839, 142 USPQ 366, 368-69 (C.C.P.A. 1964).  If the mark cannot be adequately depicted in a single rendition, applicant must file a petition to the Director requesting that the requirement to provide a single rendition of the mark be waived.  TMEP §807.10.

 

In this case, the amended drawing shows the design of the product with broken lines representing the knob, buttons, clock-face, and USB inputs. However, there are two additional vertical lines on the right side of the product which are not accounted for in this mark description. As a result, Applicant must either (1) delete these lines, or (2) describe what these lines represent and clarify whether they are or are not being claimed as part of the mark.

If the drawing of the mark includes additional matter not claimed as part of the mark (e.g., matter that shows the position or placement of the mark), applicant must depict such matter using broken or dotted lines.  37 C.F.R. §2.52(b)(4); Kohler Co. v. Honda Giken Kogyo K.K., 125 USPQ2d 1468, 1488 (TTAB 2017) (quoting In re Heatcon, Inc., 116 USPQ2d 1366, 1379 (TTAB 2015)); TMEP §§807.08, 1202.02(c)(i); see In re Water Gremlin Co., 605 F.2d 841, 844, 208 USPQ 89, 91 (C.C.P.A. 1980).

In addition to these drawing requirements, applicant must also submit a clear and concise description of the mark that does the following:

 

(1)       Indicates the mark is a three-dimensional configuration of the goods or their packaging or of a specific design feature of the goods or packaging.

 

(2)       Specifies all the elements in the drawing that constitute the mark and are claimed as part of the mark.

 

(3)       Specifies any elements that are not part of the mark and indicates that the matter shown in broken or dotted lines is not part of the mark and serves only to show the position or placement of the mark. 

 

See 37 C.F.R. §§2.37, 2.52(b)(2), (b)(4); In re Famous Foods, Inc., 217 USPQ 177, 177 (TTAB 1983); TMEP §§807.08, 807.10, 1202.02(c)(ii). 

 

In this case, the description submitted with the application (1) refers to the mark as “product packaging” rather than product design, (2) describes matter not in the mark, and (3) does not specify all elements that are not part of the mark.

 

Should Applicant delete the broken lines from the drawing, the mark description as amended is accurate. If not, the following mark description format is suggested, if accurate: 

 

The mark consists of a three-dimensional configuration of an alarm clock and integrated battery charger in a frutopyramidal shape. The broken lines depicting the knob, buttons, clock-face, USB inputs, and {describe what the vertical lines on the right side of the mark are depicting} are not part of the mark.

See TMEP §1202.02(c)(ii).

RESPONSE GUIDELINES

 

Applicant must respond within six months of the date of issuance of this final Office action or the application will be abandoned.  15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §2.65(a).  Applicant may respond by providing one or both of the following:

 

(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).

 

 

 

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 final Office action and/or appeal it to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB).

 

 

Riso, Mark

/Mark Riso/

Mark Riso

Trademark Examining Attorney

Office 108

Phone (571)272-0167

mark.riso@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. 88221519 - 4684-02500

To: TXS Industrial Design, Inc. (dallastrademarks@dfw.conleyrose.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88221519 - 4684-02500
Sent: July 09, 2019 12:30:07 PM
Sent As: ecom108@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on July 09, 2019 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88221519

 

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. 

 

 

Riso, Mark

/Mark Riso/

Mark Riso

Trademark Examining Attorney

Office 108

Phone (571)272-0167

mark.riso@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 July 09, 2019, 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