To: | BrewDog plc (jbegler@nvlawllp.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88323476 - HAWKES DEAD AND BERRIED - N/A |
Sent: | December 04, 2019 09:46:03 AM |
Sent As: | ecom123@uspto.gov |
Attachments: |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88323476
Mark: HAWKES DEAD AND BERRIED
|
|
Correspondence Address: |
|
Applicant: BrewDog plc
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N/A
Correspondence Email Address: |
|
SUSPENSION NOTICE
No Response Required
Issue date: December 04, 2019
The application is suspended for the reason specified below. See 37 C.F.R. §2.67; TMEP §§716 et seq.
Prior-filed potentially conflicting pending application. The pending application below has an earlier filing date or effective filing date than applicant’s application. If the mark in the application below registers, the USPTO may refuse registration of applicant’s mark under Section 2(d) because of a likelihood of confusion with the registered mark. 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see 37 C.F.R. §2.83; TMEP §§1208.02(c). Action on this application is suspended until the prior-filed application below either registers or abandons. 37 C.F.R. §2.83(c). Information relevant to the application below was sent previously.
- U.S. Application Serial No. 87647202 (HAWKES)
The applicant has indicated in its response dated November 18, 2019, that the owner of the cited pending application is a subsidiary of Applicant. This statement alone is insufficient to show unity of control between the entities. Unity of control is presumed in instances where, absent contradictory evidence, one party owns (1) all of another entity, or (2) substantially all of another entity and asserts control over the activities of that other entity. See TMEP §1201.07(b)(i)-(ii). Such ownership is established, for example, when one party owns all or substantially all of the stock of another or when one party is a wholly owned subsidiary of another. See In re Wella A.G., 5 USPQ2d at 1361; TMEP §1201.07(b)(i)-(ii). It is additionally presumed when, absent contradictory evidence, applicant is shown in USPTO records as a joint owner of the cited registration, or the owner of the registration is listed as a joint owner of the application, and applicant submits a written statement asserting control over the use of the mark by virtue of joint ownership. TMEP §1201.07(b)(ii).
Requirement maintained and continued. The following requirement is maintained and continued:
• Amendment of Classification and Identification of Goods Required
See TMEP §713.02.
This requirement will be made final once this application is removed from suspension, unless a new issue arises. See TMEP §716.01.
AMENDMENT OF CLASSIFICATION AND IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS REQUIRED
(MAINTAINED AND CONTINUED)
Applicant may adopt the following identification, if accurate:
International Class
032: "Cider Non-alcoholic cider"
International Class 033: "Cider Hard cider"
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 Requirements
(1) List the goods 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 fee already paid (view the USPTO’s current fee schedule). The application identifies goods that are classified in at least two international classes; however, applicant submitted a fee sufficient for only one international class. 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.
Suspension process. The USPTO will periodically check this application to determine if it should remain suspended. See TMEP §716.04. As needed, the trademark examining attorney will issue a letter to applicant to inquire about the status of the reason for the suspension. TMEP §716.05.
No response required. Applicant may file a response, but is not required to do so.
Yi, Crystal
/Crystal H. Yi/
Examining Attorney
Law Office 123
571.270.0763
crystal.yi@uspto.gov