UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)

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

 

 

 

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: 4/29/2019

 

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(d) Refusal – Likelihood of Confusion

·       Amend Identification of Services

·       Multiple-Class Application Requirements

·       Advisory – Prior-Filed Applications

 

Section 2(d) Refusal – Likelihood of Confusion

 

Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the marks in U.S. Registration Nos. 4861583, 4906380, 3990396, 5617489, 5279119, 3122598, and 5024519. Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq. See the attached registrations.

 

Applicant’s mark is ALTITUDE for “Retail services in the field of exercise equipment and fitness equipment, including aerial arts equipment; franchising services” in class 35 and “Recreation, training, sporting and educational services; provision of group and individual exercise instruction; physical fitness and exercise instruction, including aerial arts, pole fitness, and yoga instruction; gymnastic and dance instruction; provision of fitness, exercise and dance facilities, conducting exercise classes; provision of apparatus for exercise and fitness; party and event planning services; organization of entertainment and fitness events; advisory and consultancy regarding the aforesaid, including via a website; none of the aforesaid being related to endurance training at high altitudes” in class 41. The registered marks are as follows:

 

Registration No.	Mark	Identification of Services
4861583	ALTITUDE – THE HEIGHT OF FITNESS	Class 41: Conducting fitness classes; conducting fitness classes and aerobics classes; conducting fitness and exercise clinics; health clubs services, namely, providing instruction and equipment in the field of physical exercise and health and fitness training; physical fitness studio services, namely, providing group exercise instruction, equipment, and facilities; personal trainer services; physical fitness instruction; physical fitness training services
4906380	HIGH ALTITUDE PERSONAL TRAINING	Class 41: Personal trainer services; Personal training provided in connection with weight loss and exercise programs; Personal training services, namely, strength and conditioning training; Providing facilities for fitness and exercise training
3990396	ALTITUDE	Class 41: Providing recreational services in the nature of pools, providing swimming pools, providing swimming pools at a hotel
5617489	ALTITUDE	Class 41: Educational services, namely, arranging and conducting conferences, exhibitions, and special events for social entertainment purposes all in the field of travel and travel expense
5279119	ALTITUDE	Class 41: educational services, namely, conducting seminars, conferences, workshops, demonstrations in the field of cloud application software for financial management, education and government, technology, human capital management, cloud-based software, human resources, recruiting, analytics, learning management and learning tools; professional training services, namely, training in the field of cloud application software for financial management, education and government, technology, human capital management, cloud-based software, human resources, recruiting, analytics, learning management and learning tools
3122598	HIGH ALTITUDE	Class 35: Retail store services featuring bikes, bike accessories, camping equipment, outdoor clothing, imported goods, namely, women’s clothing and accessories
5024519	CHANGING ALTITUDE	Class 35: Advertising; marketing; business management; business administration; office functions

 

Trademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration of an applied-for mark that is so similar to a registered mark that it is likely consumers would be confused, mistaken, or deceived as to the commercial source of the services of the parties. See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d). Likelihood of confusion is determined on a case-by-case basis by applying the factors set forth in In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 1361, 177 USPQ 563, 567 (C.C.P.A. 1973) (called the “du Pont factors”). In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1322, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1747 (Fed. Cir. 2017). Only those factors that are “relevant and of record” need be considered. M2 Software, Inc. v. M2 Commc’ns, Inc., 450 F.3d 1378, 1382, 78 USPQ2d 1944, 1947 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (citing Shen Mfg. Co. v. Ritz Hotel Ltd., 393 F.3d 1238, 1241, 73 USPQ2d 1350, 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2004)); see In re Inn at St. John’s, LLC, 126 USPQ2d 1742, 1744 (TTAB 2018).

 

Although not all du Pont factors may be relevant, there are generally two key considerations in any likelihood of confusion analysis:  (1) the similarities between the compared marks and (2) the relatedness of the compared services. See In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d at 1322, 123 USPQ2d at 1747 (quoting Herbko Int’l, Inc. v. Kappa Books, Inc., 308 F.3d 1156, 1164-65, 64 USPQ2d 1375, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2002)); Federated Foods, Inc. v. Fort Howard Paper Co.,544 F.2d 1098, 1103, 192 USPQ 24, 29 (C.C.P.A. 1976) (“The fundamental inquiry mandated by [Section] 2(d) goes to the cumulative effect of differences in the essential characteristics of the [services] and differences in the marks.”); TMEP §1207.01.

 

Comparison of the Marks

 

Marks are compared in their entireties for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression. Stone Lion Capital Partners, LP v. Lion Capital LLP, 746 F.3d 1317, 1321, 110 USPQ2d 1157, 1160 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (quoting Palm Bay Imps., Inc. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee En 1772, 396 F.3d 1369, 1371, 73 USPQ2d 1689, 1691 (Fed. Cir. 2005)); TMEP §1207.01(b)-(b)(v). “Similarity in any one of these elements may be sufficient to find the marks confusingly similar.” In re Inn at St. John’s, LLC, 126 USPQ2d 1742, 1746 (TTAB 2018) (citing In re Davia, 110 USPQ2d 1810, 1812 (TTAB 2014)); TMEP §1207.01(b).

 

In this case, the marks are similar because they all contain the word ALTITUDE.

 

In a likelihood of confusion determination, the marks in their entireties are compared for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression. In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1323, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2017); Stone Lion Capital Partners, LP v. Lion Capital LLP, 746 F.3d 1317, 1321, 110 USPQ2d 1157, 1160 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (quoting Palm Bay Imps., Inc. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee En 1772, 396 F.3d 1369, 1371, 73 USPQ2d 1689, 1691 (Fed. Cir. 2005)); In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 1361, 177 USPQ 563, 567 (C.C.P.A. 1973); TMEP §1207.01(b)-(b)(v).

 

In the case of Registration Nos. 3990396, 5617489, and 5279119, the literal element of each registered mark is ALTITUDE and the applied-for mark is also ALTITUDE. These marks are identical in appearance, sound, and meaning, “and have the potential to be used . . . in exactly the same manner.” In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 116 USPQ2d 1406, 1411 (TTAB 2015), aff’d, 866 F.3d 1315, 123 USPQ2d 1744 (Fed. Cir. 2017). Additionally, because they are identical, these marks are likely to engender the same connotation and overall commercial impression when considered in connection with applicant’s and registrant’s respective services. Id. Therefore, the marks are confusingly similar.

 

In the case of Registration Nos. 4861583 (ALTITUDE – THE HEIGHT OF FITNESS), 4906380 (HIGH ALTITUDE PERSONAL TRAINING), 3122598 (HIGH ALTITUDE), and 5024519 (CHANGING ALTITUDE), the entire applied-for mark, ALTITUDE, is incorporated within each of the registered marks. Incorporating the entirety of one mark within another does not obviate the similarity between the compared marks, nor does it overcome a likelihood of confusion under Section 2(d). See Wella Corp. v. Cal. Concept Corp., 558 F.2d 1019, 1022, 194 USPQ 419, 422 (C.C.P.A. 1977) (finding CALIFORNIA CONCEPT and surfer design and CONCEPT confusingly similar); Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Jos. E. Seagram & Sons, Inc., 526 F.2d 556, 557, 188 USPQ 105, 106 (C.C.P.A. 1975) (finding BENGAL LANCER and design and BENGAL confusingly similar); In re Integrated Embedded, 120 USPQ2d 1504, 1513 (TTAB 2016) (finding BARR GROUP and BARR confusingly similar); In re Mr. Recipe, LLC, 118 USPQ2d 1084, 1090 (TTAB 2016) (finding JAWS DEVOUR YOUR HUNGER and JAWS confusingly similar); TMEP §1207.01(b)(iii). In the present case, the marks are identical in part.

 

Comparison of the Services

 

The services are compared to determine whether they are similar, commercially related, or travel in the same trade channels. See Coach Servs., Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356, 1369-71, 101 USPQ2d 1713, 1722-23 (Fed. Cir. 2012); Herbko Int’l, Inc. v. Kappa Books, Inc., 308 F.3d 1156, 1165, 64 USPQ2d 1375, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2002); TMEP §§1207.01, 1207.01(a)(vi). The determination of the likelihood of confusion is based on the description of the services stated in the application and registration at issue, not on extrinsic evidence of actual use. See In re Detroit Athletic Co., 903 F.3d 1297, 1307, 128 USPQ2d 1047, 1052 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (citing In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1325, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1749 (Fed. Cir. 2017)).

 

In this case, the application use broad wording to describe its services, which therefore presumably encompasses all services of the type described, including the more narrow identifications listed in the registrations. See, e.g., In re Solid State Design Inc., 125 USPQ2d 1409, 1412-15 (TTAB 2018); Sw. Mgmt., Inc. v. Ocinomled, Ltd., 115 USPQ2d 1007, 1025 (TTAB 2015). Thus, applicant’s and registrants’ services are legally identical. See, e.g., In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 127 USPQ2d 1627, 1629 (TTAB 2018) (citing Tuxedo Monopoly, Inc. v.Gen. Mills Fun Grp., Inc., 648 F.2d 1335, 1336, 209 USPQ 986, 988 (C.C.P.A. 1981); Inter IKEA Sys. B.V. v. Akea, LLC, 110 USPQ2d 1734, 1745 (TTAB 2014); Baseball Am. Inc. v. Powerplay Sports Ltd., 71 USPQ2d 1844, 1847 n.9 (TTAB 2004)).

 

Additionally, the services of the parties have no restrictions as to nature, type, channels of trade, or classes of purchasers and are “presumed to travel in the same channels of trade to the same class of purchasers.” In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Packard Press, Inc., 281 F.3d 1261, 1268, 62 USPQ2d 1001, 1005 (Fed. Cir. 2002)). Therefore, the applicant’s and registrants’ overlapping services are related, as demonstrated in the following table:

 

Broad Identification in Application	Corresponding Narrower Identifications in Registrations
Class 35: Retail services in the field of exercise equipment and fitness equipment, including aerial arts equipment	Class 35: Retail store services featuring bikes [and] bike accessories… (Reg. No. 3122598)
Class 35: Franchising services	Class 35: Advertising; marketing; business management; business administration; office functions (Reg. No. 5024519)
Class 41: Recreation, training, sporting and educational services; … party and event planning services; organization of entertainment and fitness events	Class 41: Educational services, namely, conducting seminars, conferences, workshops, demonstrations in the field of cloud application software for financial management, education and government, technology, human capital management, cloud-based software, human resources, recruiting, analytics, learning management and learning tools; professional training services, namely, training in the field of cloud application software for financial management, education and government, technology, human capital management, cloud-based software, human resources, recruiting, analytics, learning management and learning tools (Reg. No. 5279119)   Class 41: Educational services, namely, arranging and conducting conferences, exhibitions, and special events for social entertainment purposes all in the field of travel and travel expense (Reg. No. 5617489)
Class 41: Recreation, training, sporting and educational services; provision of group and individual exercise instruction; physical fitness and exercise instruction, including aerial arts, pole fitness, and yoga instruction; gymnastic and dance instruction; … conducting exercise classes	Class 41: Conducting fitness classes; conducting fitness classes and aerobics classes; conducting fitness and exercise clinics; health clubs services, namely, providing instruction and equipment in the field of physical exercise and health and fitness training; physical fitness studio services, namely, providing group exercise instruction, equipment, and facilities; personal trainer services; physical fitness instruction; physical fitness training services (Reg. No. 4861583)   Class 41: Personal trainer services; Personal training provided in connection with weight loss and exercise programs; Personal training services, namely, strength and conditioning training (Reg. No. 4906380)
Class 41: provision of fitness, exercise and dance facilities; … provision of apparatus for exercise and fitness	Class 41: Providing recreational services in the nature of pools, providing swimming pools, providing swimming pools at a hotel (Reg. No. 3990396)   Class 41: Health clubs services, namely, providing instruction and equipment in the field of physical exercise and health and fitness training; physical fitness studio services, namely, providing group exercise instruction, equipment, and facilities (Reg. No. 4861583)   Class 41: Providing facilities for fitness and exercise training (Reg. No. 4906380)

 

Therefore, upon encountering the relevant marks used in connection with the relevant services, consumers are likely to be confused and mistakenly believe that the respective services emanate from a common source. Consequently, registration is refused under Section 2(d).

 

Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration. However, if applicant responds to the refusal, applicant must also respond to the requirements set forth below.

 

Identification of Services

 

The identification of services currently reads:

 

Class 35: Retail services in the field of exercise equipment and fitness equipment, including aerial arts equipment; franchising services

 

Class 41: Recreation, training, sporting and educational services; provision of group and individual exercise instruction; physical fitness and exercise instruction, including aerial arts, pole fitness, and yoga instruction; gymnastic and dance instruction; provision of fitness, exercise and dance facilities; conducting exercise classes; provision of apparatus for exercise and fitness; party and event planning services; organization of entertainment and fitness events; advisory and consultancy regarding the aforesaid, including via a website; none of the aforesaid being related to endurance training at high altitudes.

 

The wording “including” in the identification of services is indefinite and must be deleted and replaced with a definite term, such as “namely,” “consisting of,” “particularly,” or “in particular.” See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03(a). The identification must be specific and all-inclusive. This wording is an open-ended term that is not acceptable because it fails to identify specific services. See TMEP §1402.03(a).

 

The wording “franchising services” in the identification of services in class 35 must be clarified because it is too broad and could include services in other international classes. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03. Specifically, the classification of franchising services depends on the type of assistance offered: business management assistance is in class 35, financial advisory services are in class 36, and technical assistance is in class 42.

 

Additionally, the wording “recreation, training, sporting and educational services” in the identification of services in class 41 is indefinite and must be clarified because it does not specifically identify the particular services. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01.

 

Finally, the wording “event planning services” in the identification of services in class 41 must be clarified because it is too broad and could include services in other international classes. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03. In particular, this wording could encompass “Special event planning for business purposes” in class 35 and “Special event planning for social entertainment purposes” in class 41.

 

Applicant may adopt the following identification, if accurate (changes in bold, instructions in italics):

 

Class 35: Retail services in the field of exercise equipment and fitness equipment, namely, aerial arts equipment; franchising services, namely, offering business management assistance in the establishment and operation of fitness studios; franchising services, namely, consultation and assistance in business management, organization and promotion; special event planning services for business purposes

 

Class 36: Franchising services, namely, providing financial information and advice regarding the establishment and/or operation of fitness studios

 

Class 41: Recreation, training, sporting and educational services, namely, {specify particular services, e.g., personal fitness training services}; provision of group and individual exercise instruction; physical fitness and exercise instruction, namely, aerial arts, pole fitness, and yoga instruction; gymnastic and dance instruction; provision of fitness, exercise and dance facilities; conducting exercise classes; provision of apparatus for exercise and fitness; party and special event planning services for social entertainment purposes; organization of entertainment and fitness events; advisory and consultancy regarding the aforesaid, namely, providing information on the aforesaid via a website; none of the aforesaid being related to endurance training at high altitudes.

 

Class 42: Franchising services, namely, planning and design of information technology systems for business franchises

 

Applicant may amend the identification to clarify or limit the services, but not to broaden or expand the services beyond those in the original application or as acceptably amended. See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06. Generally, any deleted services may not later be reinserted. See TMEP §1402.07(e).

 

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

 

Multiple-Class Application Requirements

 

The application potentially includes services in more than one international class; therefore, applicant must satisfy all the requirements below for each international class based on Trademark Act Section 1(b):

 

(1)       List the services by their international class number in consecutive numerical order, starting with the lowest numbered class.

 

(2)       Submit a filing fee for each international class not covered by the fees already paid (view the USPTO’s current fee schedule). The application potentially includes services that are classified in at least 4 classes; however, applicant submitted fees sufficient for only 2 classes. Applicant must either submit the filing fees for the classes not covered by the submitted fees or restrict the application to the number of classes covered by the fees already paid.

 

See 15 U.S.C. §§1051(b), 1112, 1126(e); 37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(6)-(7), 2.34(a)(2)-(3), 2.86(a); TMEP §§1403.01, 1403.02(c).

 

See an overview of the requirements for a Section 1(b) multiple-class application and how to satisfy the requirements online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form.

 

Fees

 

The fee for adding classes to a TEAS Reduced Fee (RF) application is $275 per class. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.6(a)(1)(iii), 2.23(a). See more information regarding the requirements for maintaining the lower TEAS RF fee and, if these requirements are not satisfied, for adding classes at a higher fee using regular TEAS.

 

Advisory – Prior-Filed Applications

 

The filing dates of pending U.S. Application Serial Nos. 87887767 and 87842374 precedes applicant’s filing date. See attached referenced applications. If the mark in either referenced application registers, applicant’s mark may be refused registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d) because of a likelihood of confusion between the two marks. See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); 37 C.F.R. §2.83; TMEP §§1208 et seq. Therefore, upon receipt of applicant’s response to this Office action, action on this application may be suspended pending final disposition of the earlier-filed referenced applications.

 

In response to this Office action, applicant may present arguments in support of registration by addressing the issue of the potential conflict between applicant’s mark and the marks in the referenced applications. Applicant’s election not to submit arguments at this time in no way limits applicant’s right to address this issue later if a refusal under Section 2(d) issues.

 

Advisory – Supplemental Search May Raise Additional Cites

 

As discussed in more detail in the Identification section, above, the open ended wording of applicant’s identification results in an identification that potentially encompasses a wide variety of services. Accordingly, the examining attorney may conduct a supplemental search after applicant amends the identification and limits its services to a defined scope. Depending on the scope of the amended identification and the results of the supplemental search, new cites for a likelihood of confusion refusal may be raised at that point.

 

Response Guidelines

 

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(s) and/or requirement(s) 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 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.  

 

 

 

/Sara Anne Helmers/

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 126

(571) 270-3639

sara.helmers@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.

 

 

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)

 

 

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING YOUR

U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION

 

USPTO OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) HAS ISSUED

ON 4/29/2019 FOR U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 88300420

 

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 4/29/2019 (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.