To: | L3 Technologies Inc. (mbiggerstaff@tkiplaw.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88245644 - GEARBOX - N/A |
Sent: | April 25, 2020 05:05:42 PM |
Sent As: | ecom127@uspto.gov |
Attachments: |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88245644
Mark: GEARBOX
|
|
Correspondence Address: 405 LEXINGTON STREET, 37TH FLOOR
|
|
Applicant: L3 Technologies Inc.
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N/A
Correspondence Email Address: |
|
NONFINAL 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). A link to the appropriate TEAS response form appears at the end of this Office action.
Issue date: April 25, 2020
The statement of use 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
MARK ON DRAWING AND SPECIMEN DIFFER
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 in International Class 9, 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(b); TMEP §807.12(a).
In this case, the specimen displays the mark as GEAR BOX. However, the drawing displays the mark as GEARBOX. The mark on the specimen does not match the mark in the drawing because the mark on the specimen appears as two separate words rather than a compound word. Applicant has thus failed to provide the required evidence of use of the mark in commerce. See TMEP §807.12(a).
Response options. Applicant may respond to this refusal by satisfying one of the following:
(1) Submit a new drawing of the mark that shows the mark on the specimen and, if appropriate, an amendment of the description and/or color claim that agrees with the new drawing. See 37 C.F.R. §2.72(b). Applicant may amend the mark in the drawing to match the mark on the specimen but may not make any other changes or amendments that would materially alter the drawing of the mark. See 37 C.F.R. §2.72(b); TMEP §807.14.
(2) Submit a different specimen (a verified “substitute” specimen) for each applicable international class 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).
Specimens for services must show a direct association between the mark and the services and include: (1) copies of advertising and marketing material, (2) a photograph of business signage or billboards, or (3) materials showing the mark in the sale, rendering, or advertising of the services. See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(1), (c); TMEP §1301.04(a), (h)(iv)(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).
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 these response options using the online Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Drawing webpage.
SPECIMEN REFUSAL
Specimen is not an acceptable display for software. Registration is refused because the specimen in International Class 9 is not acceptable as a display associated with downloadable software and does not show the applied-for mark as actually used in commerce. Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a), (b)(1); TMEP §§904, 904.03(e), (g), 904.07(a). An application based on Trademark Act Section 1(a) must include a specimen showing the applied-for mark as actually used in commerce for each international class of goods identified in the statement of use. 15 U.S.C. §1051(a)(1); 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a).
A display specimen for downloadable software (1) must show use of the mark directly associated with the goods and (2) such use be of a point-of-sale nature. 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(1). To show use of a point-of-sale nature, a specimen generally must provide sufficient information to enable the user to download or purchase the software from a website. See TMEP §904.03(a) (citing In re Azteca Sys., Inc., 102 USPQ2d 1955, 1957 (TTAB 2012)).
In this case, the specimen does not create an association between the mark and the software and does not provide the means to enable the user to download or purchase the software from the website. See In re Sones, 590 F.3d 1282, 1286-89, 93 USPQ2d 1118, 1122-24 (Fed. Cir. 2009); In re Azteca Sys., Inc., 102 USPQ2d at 1957; TMEP §904.03(e), (i). Specifically, applicant appears to have merely submitted a webpage with the wording “GEAR BOX” with no means of purchasing the goods, and without creating any association between the mark and the applied-for software goods.
Accordingly, such material is mere advertising, which is not acceptable as a specimen for goods. See In re Siny Corp., 920 F.3d 1331, 1336, 2019 USPQ2d 127099, at *2-3 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (citing Powermatics, Inc. v. Globe Roofing Prods. Co., 341 F.2d 127, 130, 144 USPQ 430, 432 (C.C.P.A. 1965)); see also Avakoff v. S. Pac. Co., 765 F.2d 1097, 1098, 226 USPQ 435, 436 (Fed. Cir. 1985); TMEP §904.04(b), (c).
Examples of specimens. Specimens for downloadable software include instruction manuals or screen printouts from (1) webpages showing (a) the mark associated with the software and (b) ordering or purchasing information or information sufficient to download the software, (2) the actual program while running that shows the mark in the title bar, or (3) launch screens that show the mark in an introductory message box that appears after opening the program. See TMEP §904.03(e), (i), (j). 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).
Response option. Applicant may respond to the 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 the mark in actual use in commerce for the software identified 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.
Applicant may not withdraw the statement of use. See 37 C.F.R. §2.88(f); TMEP §1109.17.
For an overview of 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.
RESPONSE GUIDELINES
Please call or email the assigned trademark examining attorney with questions about this Office action. Although an examining attorney cannot provide legal advice, the examining attorney can provide additional explanation about the refusals and requirements in this Office action. See TMEP §§705.02, 709.06.
The USPTO does not accept emails as responses to Office actions; however, emails can be used for informal communications and are included in the application record. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(c), 2.191; TMEP §§304.01-.02, 709.04-.05.
How to respond. Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action.
/Katherine M. Eissenstat/
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 127
Tel: (571) 272-5886
Email: Katherine.Eissenstat@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE