Offc Action Outgoing

THE INDUSTRIAL AI PROVIDER

Uptake Technologies, Inc.

U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 88233635 - THE INDUSTRIAL AI PROVIDER - Uptake-00343

To: Uptake Technologies, Inc. (smith@ls3ip.com)
Subject: U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 88233635 - THE INDUSTRIAL AI PROVIDER - Uptake-00343
Sent: 3/22/2019 11:13:06 AM
Sent As: ECOM106@USPTO.GOV
Attachments: Attachment - 1
Attachment - 2
Attachment - 3
Attachment - 4
Attachment - 5

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)

OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION

 

U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO.  88233635

 

MARK: THE INDUSTRIAL AI PROVIDER

 

 

        

*88233635*

CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS:

       JOHN DAN SMITH III

       LEE SULLIVAN SHEA & SMITH LLP

       656 W RANDOLPH ST, FLOOR 5W

       CHICAGO, IL 60661

       

 

CLICK HERE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER:

http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp

 

VIEW YOUR APPLICATION FILE

 

APPLICANT: Uptake Technologies, Inc.

 

 

 

CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO:  

       Uptake-00343

CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS: 

       smith@ls3ip.com

 

 

 

OFFICE ACTION

 

STRICT DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER

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: 3/22/2019

 

The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney.  Applicant must respond timely and completely to the issues below.  15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES:

 

  • Section 2(e)(1) Refusal – Merely Descriptive
  • Identification of Services

 

SEARCH OF OFFICE’S DATABASE OF MARKS

 

The trademark examining attorney has searched the Office’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).

 

SECTION 2(e)(1) REFUSAL - MERELY DESCRIPTIVE

 

Registration is refused because the applied-for mark merely describes the function of applicant’s services.  Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); see TMEP §§1209.01(b), 1209.03 et seq.

 

A mark is merely descriptive if it describes an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose, or use of an applicant’s services.  TMEP §1209.01(b); see, e.g., In re TriVita, Inc., 783 F.3d 872, 874, 114 USPQ2d 1574, 1575 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (quoting In re Oppedahl & Larson LLP, 373 F.3d 1171, 1173, 71 USPQ2d 1370, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2004)); In re Steelbuilding.com, 415 F.3d 1293, 1297, 75 USPQ2d 1420, 1421 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (citing Estate of P.D. Beckwith, Inc. v. Comm’r of Patents, 252 U.S. 538, 543 (1920)). 

 

Determining the descriptiveness of a mark is done in relation to an applicant’s services, the context in which the mark is being used, and the possible significance the mark would have to the average purchaser because of the manner of its use or intended use.  See In re The Chamber of Commerce of the U.S., 675 F.3d 1297, 1300, 102 USPQ2d 1217, 1219 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (citing In re Bayer Aktiengesellschaft, 488 F.3d 960, 963-64, 82 USPQ2d 1828, 1831 (Fed. Cir. 2007)); TMEP §1209.01(b).  Descriptiveness of a mark is not considered in the abstract.  In re Bayer Aktiengesellschaft, 488 F.3d at 963-64, 82 USPQ2d at 1831.

 

Applicant has applied to register the mark THE INDUSTRIAL AI PROVIDER (in standard characters) for “Collection, systematization, and synchronization of data and information into computer databases; data analysis services; data processing services” in International Class 35 and “Predictive analytics and data science services in the field of operational technology; electronic monitoring and reporting of physical properties of an industrial asset using computers and sensors; data mining; electric sensor reading and data analysis; electronic sensor reading and data analysis; design and development of integrated data collection and wireless transmission hardware systems for equipment and for software applications associated with that equipment at industrial assets; data automation and collection services using proprietary software to evaluate, analyze and collect service data; providing on-line non-downloadable software for use in connection with predictive analytics and data science services in the field of operational technology, monitoring and reporting of physical properties of an industrial asset using computers and sensors, data mining, electric sensor reading and data analysis, electronic sensor reading and data analysis, integrated data collection and wireless transmission hardware systems for equipment and for software applications associated with that equipment at industrial assets, and data automation and collection services using proprietary software to evaluate, analyze and collect service data; providing on-line non-downloadable software for use in predictive analytics and data science services; configuration and customization of computer databases featuring information for use in predictive analytics and data science services; providing on-line non-downloadable software for use in repair or maintenance of industrial assets; configuration and customization of computer databases featuring technical information for use in repair or maintenance of industrial assets; providing on-line non-downloadable software for use in industrial analytics, namely, for use in predictive analytics, data science, data mining, data collection, data analysis, data visualization, computer modeling, predictive modeling, and machine learning related to industrial assets or operations; providing on-line non-downloadable software for use in industrial analytics, namely, for use in predictive analytics, data science, data mining, data collection, data analysis, data visualization, computer modeling, predictive modeling, and machine learning in the field of operational technology; configuration and customization of computer databases featuring information for use in industrial analytics, namely, for use in predictive analytics, data science, data mining, data collection, data analysis, data visualization, computer modeling, predictive modeling, and machine learning related to industrial assets or operations; configuration and customization of computer databases featuring information for use in industrial analytics, namely, for use in predictive analytics, data science, data mining, data collection, data analysis, data visualization, computer modeling, predictive modeling, and machine learning in the field of operational technology; providing on-line non-downloadable software for use in industrial modeling, namely, for use in computer modeling of industrial assets or operations; configuration and customization of computer databases featuring information for use in industrial modeling, namely, for use in computer modeling of industrial assets or operations” in International Class 42.

 

The attached Internet dictionary evidence from Merriam-Webster shows that “industrial” means “used in or developed for use in industry.”  The same source shows that “AI” is short for “artificial intelligence”, while a “provider” is “one that provides.”  Thus, the wording is merely descriptive for the function of the services, in that applicant is one who provides artificial intelligence software that has been developed for use in industry.

 

Generally, if the individual components of a mark retain their descriptive meaning in relation to the services, the combination results in a composite mark that is itself descriptive and not registrable.  In re Fat Boys Water Sports LLC, 118 USPQ2d 1511, 1516 (TTAB 2016) (citing In re Tower Tech, Inc., 64 USPQ2d 1314, 1317-18 (TTAB (2002)); TMEP §1209.03(d); see, e.g., Apollo Med. Extrusion Techs., Inc. v. Med. Extrusion Techs., Inc., 123 USPQ2d 1844, 1851 (TTAB 2017) (holding MEDICAL EXTRUSION TECHNOLOGIES merely descriptive of medical extrusion goods produced by employing medical extrusion technologies); In re Cannon Safe, Inc., 116 USPQ2d 1348, 1351 (TTAB 2015) (holding SMART SERIES merely descriptive of metal gun safes); In re King Koil Licensing Co., 79 USPQ2d 1048, 1052 (TTAB 2006) (holding THE BREATHABLE MATTRESS merely descriptive of beds, mattresses, box springs, and pillows). 

 

Only where the combination of descriptive terms creates a unitary mark with a unique, incongruous, or otherwise nondescriptive meaning in relation to the services is the combined mark registrable.  See In re Colonial Stores, Inc., 394 F.2d 549, 551, 157 USPQ 382, 384 (C.C.P.A. 1968); In re Positec Grp. Ltd., 108 USPQ2d 1161, 1162-63 (TTAB 2013).

 

In this case, both the individual components and the composite result are descriptive of applicant’s services and do not create a unique, incongruous, or nondescriptive meaning in relation to the services.  Specifically, the combination merely describes that the AI service provider in this case serves the industrial sector; please see the attached Internet evidence that shows that an “AI provider” is generally known wording for applicant’s services.

 

In sum, applicant’s mark is merely descriptive because it describes a function of applicant’s services and consumers are likely to perceive the proposed mark as describing a function of the services rather than the source of the services.

 

Accordingly, registration is refused pursuant to Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act.

 

SUPPLEMENTAL REGISTER

 

Although an amendment to the Supplemental Register would normally be an appropriate response to this refusal, such a response is not appropriate in the present case.  The instant application was filed under Trademark Act Section 1(b) and is not eligible for registration on the Supplemental Register until an acceptable amendment to allege use meeting the requirements of 37 C.F.R. §2.76 has been timely filed.  37 C.F.R. §2.47(d); TMEP §§816.02, 1102.03.

 

If applicant files an acceptable allegation of use and also amends to the Supplemental Register, the application effective filing date will be the date applicant met the minimum filing requirements under 37 C.F.R. §2.76(c) for an amendment to allege use.  TMEP §§816.02, 1102.03; see 37 C.F.R. §2.75(b).  In addition, the undersigned trademark examining attorney will conduct a new search of the USPTO records for conflicting marks based on the later application filing date.  TMEP §§206.01, 1102.03.

 

Although registration on the Supplemental Register does not afford all the benefits of registration on the Principal Register, it does provide the following advantages to the registrant:

 

(1)        Use of the registration symbol ® with the registered mark in connection with the designated services, which provides public notice of the registration and potentially deters third parties from using confusingly similar marks.

 

(2)        Inclusion of the registered mark in the USPTO’s database of registered and pending marks, which will (a) make it easier for third parties to find it in trademark search reports, (b) provide public notice of the registration, and thus (c) potentially deter third parties from using confusingly similar marks.

 

(3)        Use of the registration by a USPTO trademark examining attorney as a bar to registering confusingly similar marks in applications filed by third parties.

 

(4)        Use of the registration as a basis to bring suit for trademark infringement in federal court, which, although more costly than state court, means judges with more trademark experience, often faster adjudications, and the opportunity to seek an injunction, actual damages, and attorneys’ fees and costs.

 

(5)        Use of the registration as a filing basis for a trademark application for registration in certain foreign countries, in accordance with international treaties.

 

See 15 U.S.C. §§1052(d), 1091, 1094; J. Thomas McCarthy, McCarthy on Trademarks & Unfair Competition §§19:33, 19:37 (rev. 4th ed. Supp. 2017).

 

To amend an intent-to-use application under Trademark Act Section 1(b) to use in commerce, an applicant must file, prior to approval of the mark for publication, an acceptable amendment to allege use.  See 15 U.S.C. §1051(c); 37 C.F.R. §2.76; TMEP §§806.01(b), 1103.  An amendment to allege use must satisfy the following requirements:

 

(1)        STATEMENTS:  The following statements: The applicant is the owner of the mark sought to be registered.” and “The applicant is using the mark in commerce on or in connection with all the services in the application or notice of allowance, or as subsequently modified.”

 

(2)        DATES OF FIRST USE:  The date of first use of the mark anywhereon or in connection with the services, and the date of first use of the mark in commerceas a trademark or service mark.  See more information about dates of use.

 

(3)        SERVICES:  The services specified in the application.

 

(4)        SPECIMEN:  A specimen showing how applicant uses the mark in commerce for each class of services for which use is being asserted.  If a single specimen supports multiple classes, applicant should indicate which classes the specimen supports rather than providing multiple copies of the same specimen.  See more information about specimens.

 

(5)        FEES:  A filing fee for each international class of services for which use is being asserted (find current fee information).

 

(6)        VERIFICATION:  Verification of (1) through (4) above in an affidavit or signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20.  See more information about verification.

 

See 37 C.F.R. §2.76(b); TMEP §1104.08.

 

An amendment to allege use may be filed online via the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS).  Filing an amendment to allege use is not considered a response to an Office action.  37 C.F.R. §2.76(h); TMEP §1104.  An applicant must file a separate response to any outstanding Office action.  TMEP §1104; see 37 C.F.R. §2.76(h). 

 

ADVISORY – DISCLAIMER REQUIRED

 

Applicant is advised that, if an acceptable allegation of use and an amendment to the Supplemental Register are filed, applicant will be required to disclaim “AI” because such wording appears to be generic in the context of applicant’s services.  See 15 U.S.C. §1056(a); In re Wella Corp., 565 F.2d 143, 144, 196 USPQ 7, 8 (C.C.P.A. 1977); In re Creative Goldsmiths of Wash., Inc., 229 USPQ 766, 768 (TTAB 1986); TMEP §1213.03(b).

 

Applicant may submit a disclaimer in the following format:

 

No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “AI” apart from the mark as shown.

 

TMEP §1213.08(a)(i).

 

For an overview of disclaimers and instructions on how to satisfy this issue using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), see the Disclaimer webpage.

 

Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.

 

If applicant responds to the refusal, applicant must also respond to the requirement set forth below.

 

IDENTIFICATION OF SERVICES

 

The identification of services is indefinite and must be clarified because some of the items need additional wording to make the nature clear for the record.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01. 

 

For example, “data analysis” needs to have the type of data specified.

 

In addition, applicant must amend the wording “Predictive analytics and data science services in the field of operational technology” to specify the common commercial or generic name of the services.  See TMEP §1402.01.  If the services have no common commercial or generic name, applicant must describe or explain the nature of the services using clear and succinct language.  See id.

 

And finally, the software services must be further specified that the software is for temporary use only in International Class 42.

 

Applicant should note that any wording in bold, in italics, underlined and/or in ALL CAPS below offers guidance and/or shows the changes being proposed for the identification of services.  If there is wording in the applicant’s version of the identification of services which should be removed, it will be shown with a line through it such as this: strikethrough.  When making its amendments, applicant should enter them in standard font, not in bold, in italics, underlined and/or in ALL CAPS.

 

Applicant may adopt the following identification, if accurate:

 

International Class 35:  Collection, systematization, and synchronization of data and information into computer databases; BUSINESS data analysis services; Data processing services

 

International Class 42:  Predictive analytics and data science services in the field of operational technology, NAMELY, ______________ {specify common commercial name for the services}; Electronic monitoring and reporting of physical properties of an industrial asset using computers and sensors; Data mining; Electric sensor reading and data analysis; Electronic sensor reading and data analysis; PRODUCT design and development of integrated data collection and wireless transmission hardware systems for equipment and for software applications associated with that equipment at industrial assets; Data automation and collection services using proprietary software to evaluate, analyze and collect service data; Providing TEMPORARY USE OF on-line non-downloadable software for use in connection with predictive analytics and data science services in the field of operational technology, monitoring and reporting of physical properties of an industrial asset using computers and sensors, data mining, electric sensor reading and data analysis, electronic sensor reading and data analysis, integrated data collection and wireless transmission hardware systems for equipment and for software applications associated with that equipment at industrial assets, and data automation and collection services using proprietary software to evaluate, analyze and collect service data; Providing TEMPORARY USE OF on-line non-downloadable software for use in predictive analytics and data science services; Configuration and customization of computer databases featuring information for use in predictive analytics and data science services; Providing TEMPORARY USE OF on-line non-downloadable software for use in repair or maintenance of industrial assets; Configuration and customization of computer databases featuring technical information for use in repair or maintenance of industrial assets; Providing TEMPORARY USE OF on-line non-downloadable software for use in industrial analytics, namely, for use in predictive analytics, data science, data mining, data collection, data analysis, data visualization, computer modeling, predictive modeling, and machine learning related to industrial assets or operations; Providing TEMPORARY USE OF on-line non-downloadable software for use in industrial analytics, namely, for use in predictive analytics, data science, data mining, data collection, data analysis, data visualization, computer modeling, predictive modeling, and machine learning in the field of operational technology; Configuration and customization of computer databases featuring information for use in industrial analytics, namely, for use in predictive analytics, data science, data mining, data collection, data analysis, data visualization, computer modeling, predictive modeling, and machine learning related to industrial assets or operations; Configuration and customization of computer databases featuring information for use in industrial analytics, namely, for use in predictive analytics, data science, data mining, data collection, data analysis, data visualization, computer modeling, predictive modeling, and machine learning in the field of operational technology; Providing TEMPORARY USE OF on-line non-downloadable software for use in industrial modeling, namely, for use in computer modeling of industrial assets or operations; Configuration and customization of computer databases featuring information for use in industrial modeling, namely, for use in computer modeling of industrial assets or operations

 

Applicant’s services 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.  Applicant may clarify or limit the identification by inserting qualifying language or deleting items to result in a more specific identification; however, applicant may not substitute different services or add services not found or encompassed by those in the original application or as acceptably amended.  See TMEP §1402.06(a)-(b).  The scope of the services sets the outer limit for any changes to the identification and is generally determined by the ordinary meaning of the wording in the identification.  TMEP §§1402.06(b), 1402.07(a)-(b).  Any acceptable changes to the services will further limit scope, and once services are deleted, they are not permitted to be reinserted.  TMEP §1402.07(e).

 

For assistance with identifying and classifying services in trademark applications, please see the USPTO’s online searchable U.S. Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual.  See TMEP §1402.04.

 

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.

 

Please call or email the assigned trademark examining attorney with questions about this Office action.  Although the trademark examining attorney cannot provide legal advice or statements about applicant’s rights, the trademark examining attorney can provide applicant with additional explanation about the refusal and requirement in this Office action.  See TMEP §§705.02, 709.06.  Although the USPTO does not accept emails as responses to Office actions, emails can be used for informal communications and will be included in the application record.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(c), 2.191; TMEP §§304.01-.02, 709.04-.05. 

 

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 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.  

 

 

 

Cameron McBride

/Cameron McBride/

Examining Attorney - Trademarks

Law Office 106

(571) 272-0542

Cameron.McBride@USPTO.gov

 

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.

 

 

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 88233635 - THE INDUSTRIAL AI PROVIDER - Uptake-00343

To: Uptake Technologies, Inc. (smith@ls3ip.com)
Subject: U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 88233635 - THE INDUSTRIAL AI PROVIDER - Uptake-00343
Sent: 3/22/2019 11:13:07 AM
Sent As: ECOM106@USPTO.GOV
Attachments:

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)

 

 

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING YOUR

U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION

 

USPTO OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) HAS ISSUED

ON 3/22/2019 FOR U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 88233635

 

Please follow the instructions below:

 

(1)  TO READ THE LETTER:  Click on this link or go to http://tsdr.uspto.gov,enter the U.S. application serial number, and click on “Documents.”

 

The Office action may not be immediately viewable, to allow for necessary system updates of the application, but will be available within 24 hours of this e-mail notification.

 

(2)  TIMELY RESPONSE IS REQUIRED:  Please carefully review the Office action to determine (1) how to respond, and (2) the applicable response time period.  Your response deadline will be calculated from 3/22/2019 (or sooner if specified in the Office action).  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.  For information regarding response time periods, see http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/process/status/responsetime.jsp.

 

Do NOT hit “Reply” to this e-mail notification, or otherwise e-mail your response because the USPTO does NOT accept e-mails as responses to Office actions.  Instead, the USPTO recommends that you respond online using the TEAS response form located at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp.

 

(3)  QUESTIONS:  For questions about the contents of the Office action itself, please contact the assigned trademark examining attorney.  For technical assistance in accessing or viewing the Office action in the Trademark Status and Document Retrieval (TSDR) system, please e-mail TSDR@uspto.gov.

 

WARNING

 

Failure to file the required response by the applicable response deadline will result in the ABANDONMENT of your application.  For more information regarding abandonment, see http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/basics/abandon.jsp.

 

PRIVATE COMPANY SOLICITATIONS REGARDING YOUR APPLICATION:  Private companies not associated with the USPTO are using information provided in trademark applications to mail or e-mail trademark-related solicitations.  These companies often use names that closely resemble the USPTO and their solicitations may look like an official government document.  Many solicitations require that you pay “fees.” 

 

Please carefully review all correspondence you receive regarding this application to make sure that you are responding to an official document from the USPTO rather than a private company solicitation.  All official USPTO correspondence will be mailed only from the “United States Patent and Trademark Office” in Alexandria, VA; or sent by e-mail from the domain “@uspto.gov.”  For more information on how to handle private company solicitations, see http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/solicitation_warnings.jsp.

 

 


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