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: 6/2/2019

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

This Office action is supplemental to and supersedes the previous Office action issued on May 8, 2019 in connection with this application.  Based on information and/or documentation in applicant’s response, the trademark examining attorney now issues the following new refusal:  Trademark Act 23(c) refusal.  See TMEP §§706, 711.02. 

 

In a previous Office action dated May 8, 2019, the trademark examining attorney refused registration of the applied-for mark based on the following:  Trademark Action 2(e)(1) refusal for merely describing the identified goods. 

 

In addition, the following refusal(s) and/or requirement(s) have been withdrawn:  Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1) refusal.  See id. 

 

The following is a SUMMARY OF ISSUES that applicant must address:

 

            •  NEW ISSUE:  Section 23(c) Refusal – Mark is Generic

 

Applicant must respond to all issues raised in this Office action and the previous Office action, within six (6) months of the date of issuance of this Office action.  37 C.F.R. §2.62(a); see TMEP §711.02.  If applicant does not respond within this time limit, the application will be abandoned.  37 C.F.R. §2.65(a).

 

SECTION 23(c) REFUSAL – MARK IS GENERIC

REFUSAL REPRESENTS NEW ISSUE

 

Registration is refused on the Supplemental Register because the applied-for mark is generic and thus incapable of distinguishing applicant’s goods.  Trademark Act Sections 23(c) and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1091(c), 1127; see TMEP §§1209.01(c) et seq.

 

“A mark is generic if its primary significance to the relevant public is the class or category of goods or services on or in connection with which it is used.”  TMEP §1209.01(c)(i) (citing H. Marvin Ginn Corp. v. Int’l Ass’n of Fire Chiefs, Inc., 782 F.2d 987, 989-90, 228 USPQ 528, 530 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re ActiveVideo Networks, Inc., 111 USPQ2d 1581, 1600 (TTAB 2014)).  Determining whether a mark is generic requires a two-step inquiry:

 

(1)       What is the genus of goods and/or services at issue?

 

(2)       Does the relevant public understand the designation primarily to refer to that genus of goods and/or services?

 

In re Cordua Rests., Inc., 823 F.3d 594, 599, 118 USPQ2d 1632, 1634 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (citing H. Marvin Ginn Corp. v. Int’l Ass’n of Fire Chiefs, Inc., 782 F.2d at 990, 228 USPQ at 530); TMEP §1209.01(c)(i). 

 

Regarding the first part of the inquiry, the genus of the goods and/or services may be defined by an applicant’s identification of goods and/or services.  See In re Cordua Rests., Inc., 823 F.3d at 602, 118 USPQ2d at 1636 (citing Magic Wand Inc. v. RDB Inc., 940 F.2d 638, 640, 19 USPQ2d 1551, 1552 (Fed. Cir. 1991)); see also In re 1800Mattress.com IP, LLC, 586 F.3d 1359, 1361, 1363, 92 USPQ2d 1682, 1682, 1684 (Fed. Cir. 2009).   

 

In this case, the application for the mark "RAIN SHOWER HEAD" identifies the goods as "Hand-held showers; Hand held shower heads; Hand showers; Plumbing fittings, namely, shower control valves; Shower bases; Shower doors; Shower head sprayers; Shower heads; Shower mixing valves; Shower surrounds; Shower and bath cubicles; Showerheads and components thereof; Showers; Showers and shower cubicles; Water conservation plumbing fixtures, namely, faucets, aerators, showerheads, water saving toilets," which adequately defines the genus at issue.

 

The name of an ingredient, a key aspect, a central focus or feature, or a main characteristic of goods and/or services may be generic for those goods and/or services.  See In re Cordua Rests., Inc., 823 F.3d 594, 604, 118 USPQ2d 1632, 1637-38 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (affirming the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s holding of CHURRASCOS (a type of grilled meat) generic for restaurant services); In re Hotels.com LP, 573 F.3d 1300, 1304, 91 USPQ2d 1532, 1535 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (affirming the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s holding of HOTELS.COM generic for travel agency services, namely, making reservations and bookings for temporary lodging, and providing information about temporary lodging); In re Emergency Alert Sols. Grp., LLC, 122 USPQ2d 1088, 1091-93 (TTAB 2017) (holding LOCKDOWN ALARM generic for training services focusing on the use of and response to lockdown alarms); In re Meridian Rack & Pinion, 114 USPQ2d 1462, 1465-66 (TTAB 2015) (holding BUYAUTOPARTS.COM generic for on-line retail store services featuring auto parts); TMEP §1209.03(v); see also A.J. Canfield Co. v. Honickman, 808 F.2d 291, 292, 1 USPQ2d 1364, 1365 (3d Cir. 1986) (holding CHOCOLATE FUDGE generic for diet sodas).  Thus, a term does not need to be the name of a specific product and/or service to be found generic.  Any term that the relevant public understands to refer to the genus can be generic.  Royal Crown Co. v. Coca-Cola Co., 892 F.3d 1358, 1367, 127 USPQ2d 1041, 1046 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (quoting In re Cordua Rests., Inc., 823 F.3d at 603, 118 USPQ2d at 1637 (Fed. Cir. 2016)).

 

Further, use of a term as an adjective or adjectival phrase does not prevent that term from being generic if it refers to the relevant genus or category of goods and/or services.  See In re Serial Podcast, LLC, 126 USPQ2d 1061, 1068 (TTAB 2018) (quoting TMEP §1209.01(c)(ii) and cases cited therein).  Thus, an adjective or adjectival phrase may be generic if it denotes a narrower subcategory of the identified goods and/or services.  See, e.g., In re Northland Aluminum Prods. Inc., 777 F.2d 1556, 1560, 227 USPQ 961, 964 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (holding BUNDT generic for ring cake mixes); In re Mecca Grade Growers, LLC, 125 USPQ2d 1950, 1959 (TTAB 2018) (holding MECHANICALLY FLOOR-MALTED generic for malt used for brewing and distilling and for processing agricultural grain); TMEP §1209.01(c)(ii).

 

Thus, the use of the adjective "RAIN" to identify the particular type of shower head provided by applicant is also generic for the genus of the particular goods as the adjective identifies a principal, inseparable feature of the goods themselves. The evidence of record demonstrates that a rain shower head is a particular type of shower head with distinctive functionalities and features that are distinct from shower heads of other types. See attached examples of industry usage of "Rain Shower Head" to identify particular products from Bedbathandbeyond.com, Homedepot.com, Wisepick.org, Apartmenttherapy.com; see also examples from Thespruce.com, Wayfair.com, Overstock.com, Agreatshower.com, Completehomespa.com, attached previously. Thus, the phrase "RAIN SHOWER HEAD" describes the genus of a specific product.

 

Regarding the second part of the inquiry, the relevant public is the purchasing or consuming public for the identified goods and/or services.  Sheetz of Del., Inc. v. Doctor’s Assocs. Inc., 108 USPQ2d 1341, 1351 (TTAB 2013) (citing Magic Wand Inc. v. RDB Inc., 940 F.2d at 640, 19 USPQ2d at 1553).  In this case, the relevant public comprises ordinary consumers who purchase applicant’s goods, because there are no restrictions or limitations to the channels of trade or classes of consumers.  The attached evidence shows that the wording “RAIN” in the applied-for mark means "Water condensed from atmospheric vapor and falling in drops" or "A fall of such water". See attached definition from Ahdictionary.com. A "SHOWER HEAD" is defined as "a fixture for directing the spray of water in a bathroom shower". See attached definition from Merriam-webster.com. The attached evidence demonstrates that these terms are used frequently together in the relevant industry trade channels to identify bathroom fixtures that dispense water in a manner reminiscent of a rain shower. See attached examples of industry usage of "Rain Shower Head" to identify particular products from Bedbathandbeyond.com, Homedepot.com, Wisepick.org, Apartmenttherapy.com; see also examples from Thespruce.com, Wayfair.com, Overstock.com, Agreatshower.com, Completehomespa.com, attached previously. Thus, the relevant public would understand this designation to refer primarily to that genus of goods because the wording immediately identifies a specific product; a shower head with a spray pattern standardly referred to as mimicking that of rainfall.

 

For the foregoing reasons, applicant's amendment to the Supplemental Register is rejected, and registration is refusal pursuant to Section 23(c) of the Trademark Act as a result of the applied-for mark generic nature.

 

Applicant cannot overcome this refusal by submitting a claim of acquired distinctiveness under Trademark Act Section 2(f).  See 15 U.S.C. §1052(f).  Such a claim would be insufficient because “generic terms cannot be rescued by proof of distinctiveness or secondary meaning no matter how voluminous the proffered evidence may be.”  Royal Crown Co. v. Coca-Cola Co., 892 F.3d 1358, 1370, 127 USPQ2d 1041, 1048 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (quoting In re Northland Aluminum Prods., 777 F.2d 1556, 1558, 227 USPQ2d 961, 962 (Fed. Cir. 1985)); see TMEP §1212.02(i).

 

RESPONSE GUIDELINES

 

For this application to proceed, applicant must explicitly address each refusal and/or 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(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. 

 

To expedite prosecution of the application, applicant is encouraged to file its response to this Office action online via the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), which is available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/index.jsp.  If applicant has technical questions about the TEAS response to Office action form, applicant can review the electronic filing tips available online at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/e_filing_tips.jsp and e-mail technical questions to TEAS@uspto.gov.

 

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.  

 

 

Kathleen Schwarz

/Kathleen Schwarz/

Examining Attorney

Law Office 123

(571) 272-2460

kathleen.schwarz@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 6/2/2019 FOR U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 88311416

 

Your trademark application has been reviewed.  The trademark examining attorney assigned by the USPTO to your application has written an official letter to which you must respond.  Please follow these steps:

 

(1)  Read the LETTER by clicking on this link or going to http://tsdr.gov.uspto.report/, entering your U.S. application serial number, and clicking 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)  Respond within 6 months (or sooner if specified in the Office action), calculated from 6/2/2019, using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) response form located at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp.  A response transmitted through TEAS must be received before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.

 

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. 

 

(3)  Questions about the contents of the Office action itself should be directed to the trademark examining attorney who reviewed your application, identified below. 

 

Kathleen Schwarz

/Kathleen Schwarz/

Examining Attorney

Law Office 123

(571) 272-2460

kathleen.schwarz@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.