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: 5/2/2019

 

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

 

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).

 

However, applicant must respond to the following requirement.

 

DISCLAIMER REQUIRED

 

Applicant must provide a disclaimer of the unregistrable part of the applied-for mark even though the mark as a whole appears to be registrable. See 15 U.S.C. §1056(a); TMEP §§1213, 1213.03(a). In this case, applicant must disclaim the wording “FACE BAR” because it is not inherently distinctive.

 

At the outset, it is noted that, for a disclaimer, the wording being disclaimed must be in its correct spelling. See In re Omaha Nat’l Corp., 819 F.2d 1117, 1119, 2 USPQ2d 1859, 1861 (Fed. Cir. 1987); In re Carlson, 91 USPQ2d 1198, 1203 (TTAB 2009); TMEP §1213.08(c). Therefore, the discussion herein will refer to the wording “FACE BAR”. The fact that applicant presents the wording as one compound term (i.e., “FACEBAR”) does not affect a finding that the wording is not inherently distinctive. See, e.g., In re Planalytics, Inc., 70 USPQ2d 1453, 1455 (TTAB 2004) (discussing difference between “GAS BUYER” and “GASBUYER”) (“[W]e cannot see how the absence of the space creates a different meaning or perception of the term. Whether the term appears as GAS BUYER or GASBUYER, it would be understood by the relevant consumers to have the same meaning ….”); see also In re SPX Corp., 63 USPQ2d 1592, 1596 (TTAB 2002) (“[T]elescoping two words which are merely descriptive of the goods into a single term by the deletion of a space does not avoid a finding of mere descriptiveness for the combined term.”).

 

As the following evidence demonstrates, the wording “face bar” is commonly used by a variety of third parties in the beauty services industry to refer to providing beauty services for the face:

 

• Alchemy Face Bar, http://alchemyfacebar.com/pages/facebar

 

• Oasis Face Bar, http://www.oasisfacebar.com/services

 

• The Face Bar, http://www.theface.bar/pricing

 

• The Face Bar, http://thefacebar.la/about-us/

 

• Poppy & Ivy, http://www.poppyandivy.com/ (offering various beauty services under the designation “Face Bar”)

 

• Review: Facebar Skin Parlor at the Pencil Factory, ATL Intown Living, Oct. 14, 2010, http://www.atlintownliving.com/2010/10/14/facebar-skin-parlor-at-the-pencil-factory/

 

• Business Briefs: B.L.O. Salon Opens, Offers Many Services, Ventura County Star, Oct. 26, 2013 (“Annette Oshita is the owner of the salon, which includes a full salon experience, a face bar for makeup touch-ups, waxing and a style bar for quick blow-dries, buns and braids.”)

 

Applicant’s identification lists various services, including services specifically for the face (e.g., “eyebrow threading services,” “make-up application services,” “cosmetic skin care services, namely, facials, chemical peels, facial masks, and skin masks”). Thus, applicant is using “FACE BAR” in exactly the same manner as other entities in the beauty services industry to immediately and directly convey to consumers the type of services applicant provides. As such, the wording “FACE BAR” is unregistrable because it is, at best, merely descriptive of a feature of applicant’s services. See 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd., 695 F.3d 1247, 1251, 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1755 (Fed. Cir. 2012); TMEP §§1213, 1213.03(a). This conclusion is supported by attached U.S. Registration No. 5725538 for OASIS FACE BAR for “beauty salon services,” wherein the wording “FACE BAR” has been disclaimed.

 

Please note that the fact that applicant is the owner of U.S. Registration No. 5487231 for FACEBAR (which was published for opposition over two years ago) does not affect this requirement. A term that was once arbitrary or suggestive may lose its distinguishing and origin-denoting characteristics through use in a descriptive sense over a period of time, and may come to be regarded by the purchasing public as nothing more than a descriptive designation. In re Digital Research, Inc., 4 USPQ2d 1242, 1243 (TTAB 1987); In re Int’l Spike, Inc., 190 USPQ 505, 507 (TTAB 1976). Thus, trademark rights are not static, and eligibility for registration must be determined on the basis of the facts and evidence in the record at the time registration is sought. In re Chippendales USA Inc., 622 F.3d 1346, 1354, 96 USPQ2d 1681, 1686 (Fed. Cir. 2010); In re Morton-Norwich Prods., Inc., 671 F.2d 1332, 1344, 213 USPQ 9, 18 (C.C.P.A. 1982); In re Thunderbird Prods. Corp., 406 F.2d 1389, 1391, 160 USPQ 730, 732 (C.C.P.A. 1969). Here, the evidence clearly demonstrates that, at the time of the present examination, “FACE BAR” is a term of art in the beauty services industry and does not point uniquely or directly to a particular source.

 

Applicant may respond to this issue by submitting a disclaimer in the following format:

 

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

 

TMEP §1213.08(a)(i); see In re Owatonna Tool Co., 231 USPQ 493, 494 (Comm’r Pats. 1983).

 

Applicant may not claim exclusive rights to terms that others may need to use to describe their services in the marketplace. See Dena Corp. v. Belvedere Int’l, Inc., 950 F.2d 1555, 1560, 21 USPQ2d 1047, 1051 (Fed. Cir. 1991); In re Aug. Storck KG, 218 USPQ 823, 825 (TTAB 1983). Therefore, failure to comply with a disclaimer requirement will result in a refusal to register the entire mark. See In re Stereotaxis Inc., 429 F.3d 1039, 1040-41, 77 USPQ2d 1087, 1088-89 (Fed. Cir. 2005); TMEP §1213.01(b).

 

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

 

RESPONSE REQUIRED

 

For this application to proceed, applicant must explicitly address the disclaimer requirement in this Office action by setting forth the required statement. Please see “Responding to Office Actions” and the informational video “Response to Office Action” for more information and tips on responding.

 

 

/Andrew Leaser/

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 117

(571) 272-1911

andrew.leaser@uspto.gov

 

 

TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER: Informal communications will not be accepted as responses to Office actions and will not be considered; therefore, do not respond to this Office action by telephone or e-mail. Instead, go to http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp to file a formal response using the “Response to Examining Attorney Office Action” form. 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. All informal communications relevant to this application will be placed in the official application record.

 

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 RF application form must (1) file certain documents online using TEAS, including responses to Office actions (see TMEP §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. §2.23(b); TMEP §820. 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), 2.23(c); TMEP §820.04. However, in certain situations, 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.

 

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 5/2/2019 FOR U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 88307530

 

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 5/2/2019 (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.