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: 5/22/2019

 

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.

 

 

Section 2(d) Refusal Based on Likelihood of Confusion

 

Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the mark in U.S. Registration No. 2322235.  Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the attached registration.

 

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 goods and/or 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 goods and/or 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 goods [or services] and differences in the marks.”); TMEP §1207.01.

 

Similarity 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 the present case, applicant’s mark is “MSA THE SAFETY COMPANY” and registrant’s mark is “MSA SAFETY WORKS”.  Each mark begins with the identical initialism “MSA”.  Consumers are generally more inclined to focus on the first word, prefix, or syllable in any trademark or service mark.  See Palm Bay Imps., Inc. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee En 1772, 396 F.3d 1369, 1372, 73 USPQ2d 1689, 1692 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (finding similarity between VEUVE ROYALE and two VEUVE CLICQUOT marks in part because “VEUVE . . . remains a ‘prominent feature’ as the first word in the mark and the first word to appear on the label”); Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v. Century Life of Am., 970 F.2d 874, 876, 23 USPQ2d 1698, 1700 (Fed Cir. 1992) (finding similarity between CENTURY 21 and CENTURY LIFE OF AMERICA in part because “consumers must first notice th[e] identical lead word”); see also In re Detroit Athletic Co., 903 F.3d 1297, 1303, 128 USPQ2d 1047, 1049 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (finding “the identity of the marks’ two initial words is particularly significant because consumers typically notice those words first”).  In addition, each mark includes the word “SAFETY”.  The commercial impression of each mark is the same.

 

Therefore, the marks are confusingly similar. 

 

Relatedness of the Goods and/or Services

 

The goods and/or 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).

 

Applicant’s goods  are:  Batteries; battery chargers; gas, vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents detectors and parts thereof; gas, vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents measurers and parts thereof; gas, vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents analyzers and parts thereof; gas, vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents monitors and parts thereof; gas, vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents recorders and parts thereof; gas calibrators; software for use with gas detection, gas calibrators, vapor, gas, fire, and danger alarms, measurement and analysis, fire and danger alarms, plume modeling; thermal imaging cameras; respiratory protective apparatus, namely, escape respirators, air-purifying respirators, air-line respirators and self-contained breathing apparatus and parts thereof; eye and face protective apparatus, namely, masks, safety goggles, safety glasses and face shields; communications systems associated with radio communications and telemetry, voice amplifiers and transmitters; personal alert safety systems, fall detection systems and apparatus, physiological monitoring equipment, and location determination and geo-fencing; hearing protection apparatus, namely, ear plugs, ear bands, ear muffs and headsets, hearing protection, namely, electronic hearing protection not for medical use; protective wearing apparel for miners, industrial workers, firefighters and those engaged in hazardous pursuits, namely, headgear, hats, caps, winter headwear, and hoods; ballistic helmets; personal safety and fall protection equipment other than for sports, namely, full body harnesses, support belts for workers, lanyards, restraint lanyards, shock absorbing lanyards, self-retracting lanyards, lanyard shock absorbers and anchorage connectors; rope grabs; ladder climbing safety equipment, namely, ladder fall arresters; confined space entry and/or retrieval equipment, namely, personnel and material handling hoists, guard rails, self-retracting lanyards with retrieval capability, portable tripods and davits; horizontal lifelines; and vertical lifelines and descent devices that lower people at a controlled rate of speed

 

And/or

 

Registrant’s goods are: RESPIRATORS AND RESPIRATOR CARTRIDGES, NOT FOR ARTIFICIAL RESPIRATION; DUST MASKS; EYE AND FACE PROTECTION APPARATUS, NAMELY, SAFETY GLASSES, SAFETY GOGGLES AND SAFETY FACE SHIELDS; HEARING PROTECTION APPARATUS, NAMELY, EAR PLUGS FOR NONMEDICAL PURPOSES AND SAFETY EAR COVERINGS; PROTECTIVE CLOTHING; HEAD PROTECTION APPARATUS, NAMELY, SAFETY HATS AND CAPS; FALL PROTECTION EQUIPMENT, NAMELY, SAFETY HARNESSES.

 

Both applicant and registrant provide safety equipment, namely, respirators, mask, face protection apparatus, hearing protection apparatus, head protection apparatus and fall protection equipment.

 

Accordingly, registration must be refused based on a likelihood of confusion under Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act.  Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.

 

 

Ownership of Cited Registration

 

If the mark in the cited registration is owned by applicant, applicant may provide evidence of ownership of the mark by satisfying one of the following:

 

(1)       Record the assignment with the USPTO’s Assignment Recordation Branch (ownership transfer documents such as assignments can be filed online at http://etas.uspto.gov) and promptly notify the trademark examining attorney that the assignment has been duly recorded.

 

(2)       Submit copies of documents evidencing the chain of title.

 

(3)       Submit the following statement, verified with an affidavit or signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20:  “Applicant is the owner of U.S. Registration No. 2322235.”  To provide this statement using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), use the “Response to Office Action” form; answer “yes” to wizard questions #3 and #10; then, continuing on to the next portion of the form, in the “Additional Statement(s)” section, find “Active Prior Registration(s)” and insert the U.S. registration numbers in the data fields; and follow the instructions within the form for signing.  The form must be signed twice; a signature is required both in the “Declaration Signature” section and in the “Response Signature” section.

 

TMEP §812.01; see 15 U.S.C. §1060; 37 C.F.R. §§2.193(e)(1), 3.25, 3.73(a)-(b); TMEP §502.02(a).

 

Recording a document with the Assignment Recordation Branch does not constitute a response to an Office action.  TMEP §503.01(d).

 

 

If applicant responds to the refusal, applicant must also respond to the requirements set forth below.

 

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).  A disclaimer of an unregistrable part of a mark will not affect the mark’s appearance.  See Schwarzkopf v. John H. Breck, Inc., 340 F.2d 978, 979-80, 144 USPQ 433, 433 (C.C.P.A. 1965).

 

Applicant seeks registration of the wording “MSA THE SAFETY COMPANY” for “Batteries; battery chargers; gas, vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents detectors and parts thereof; gas, vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents measurers and parts thereof; gas, vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents analyzers and parts thereof; gas, vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents monitors and parts thereof; gas, vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents recorders and parts thereof; gas calibrators; software for use with gas detection, gas calibrators, vapor, gas, fire, and danger alarms, measurement and analysis, fire and danger alarms, plume modeling; thermal imaging cameras; respiratory protective apparatus, namely, escape respirators, air-purifying respirators, air-line respirators and self-contained breathing apparatus and parts thereof; eye and face protective apparatus, namely, masks, safety goggles, safety glasses and face shields; communications systems associated with radio communications and telemetry, voice amplifiers and transmitters; personal alert safety systems, fall detection systems and apparatus, physiological monitoring equipment, and location determination and geo-fencing; hearing protection apparatus, namely, ear plugs, ear bands, ear muffs and headsets, hearing protection, namely, electronic hearing protection not for medical use; protective wearing apparel for miners, industrial workers, firefighters and those engaged in hazardous pursuits, namely, headgear, hats, caps, winter headwear, and hoods; ballistic helmets; personal safety and fall protection equipment other than for sports, namely, full body harnesses, support belts for workers, lanyards, restraint lanyards, shock absorbing lanyards, self-retracting lanyards, lanyard shock absorbers and anchorage connectors; rope grabs; ladder climbing safety equipment, namely, ladder fall arresters; confined space entry and/or retrieval equipment, namely, personnel and material handling hoists, guard rails, self-retracting lanyards with retrieval capability, portable tripods and davits; horizontal lifelines; and vertical lifelines and descent devices that lower people at a controlled rate of speed”.

 

In this case, applicant must disclaim the wording “THE SAFETY COMPANY” because it is not inherently distinctive.  The word “SAFETY” is merely descriptive of a feature or purpose of applicant’s goods.  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).  In addition, business type designations and abbreviations such as “Corporation,” “Inc.,” “Company,” “LLC,” and “Ltd.” or family business designations such as “& Sons” or “Bros.” must be disclaimed, because they merely indicate applicant’s business type or structure and generally have no source-indicating capacity.  TMEP §1213.03(d); see, e.g., Goodyear’s India Rubber Glove Mfg. Co. v. Goodyear Rubber Co., 128 U.S. 598, 602-03 (1888); In re Piano Factory Grp., Inc., 85 USPQ2d at 1526; In re Patent & Trademark Servs., Inc., 49 USPQ2d at 1539-40. 

 

The word “SAFETY” is defined as “any of certain devices for preventing an accident or an undesirable effect”.  See the attached dictionary definition.

 

Consumers would readily understand the wording to describe that applicant’s company provides goods for safety.

 

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

 

No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “THE SAFETY COMPANY” apart from the mark as shown.

 

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

 

 

Identification of Goods

 

Applicant must clarify some of the wording in the identification of goods because it is indefinite and too broad.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03.  Hearing protection apparatus are in Class 10 whether for medical use or not. While headphones and communication headsets incorporating hearing protection are in Class 9, hearing protectors without the ability to reproduce or transmit sound are in Class 10. A “life-preserving” or “protection against accidents” use or purpose must be indicated for any Class 9 protective clothing or protective headgear identification.   Applicant must indicate the material composition of the guard rails and correctly classify the goods.

 

Applicant must further specify the nature or purpose of the goods and indicate the components of systems. Applicant must clarify the goods by (1) describing the nature, purpose, or use of the system; and (2) listing the system’s parts or components, using common generic terms and referencing the primary parts or components of the system first.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1401.05(d), 1402.01, 1402.03(a). 

 

Applicant may adopt the following wording, if accurate: 

 

Class 006:  Metal guard rails

 

And/or

 

Class 009:  Batteries; battery chargers; gas,  hazardous vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents detectors and parts thereof; gas, hazardous vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents measurers and parts thereof; gas, hazardous vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents analyzers and parts thereof; gas, hazardous vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents monitors and parts thereof; gas, hazardous vapors, chemical warfare or biological agents chart recorders and parts thereof; gas pressure calibrators; downloadable software for use with gas detection, gas calibrators, vapor, gas, fire, and danger alarms, measurement and analysis, fire and danger alarms, plume modeling; thermal imaging cameras; respiratory protective apparatus, namely, escape respirators, air-purifying respirators, air-line respirators and self-contained breathing apparatus and parts thereof; eye and face protective apparatus, namely, masks, safety goggles, safety glasses and face shields; communications systems comprised of _____ {specify the component parts of the system} associated with radio communications and telemetry, voice amplifiers and transmitters; personal alert safety systems comprised of ______ {specify the components of the system}; Fall detection systems and apparatus, namely, ____________ {specify the components of the system}; physiological monitoring equipment and location determination and geo-fencing, namely, _____ {specify the equipment and nature of the goods with more particularity}; communications headsets incorporating hearing protection ;  hearing protection, namely, electronic hearing protection in the nature of communications headphones not for medical use; protective wearing apparel for miners, industrial workers, firefighters and those engaged in hazardous pursuits, namely, hard hats, caps, winter headwear, and hoods for protection against accidents and fire;  ballistic resistant helmets; personal safety and fall protection equipment for fall restraint and fall arrest, other than for sports, namely, full body harnesses, support belts for workers, lanyards, restraint lanyards, shock absorbing lanyards, self-retracting lanyards, lanyard shock absorbers and anchorage connectors; rope grabs; ladder climbing safety equipment, namely, ladder fall arresters; confined space entry and/or retrieval equipment for safety purposes for fall protection, namely, personnel and material handling hoists, self-retracting lanyards with retrieval capability, portable tripods and davits; safety horizontal lifelines; and safety vertical lifelines and descent devices that lower people at a controlled rate of speed

 

And/or

 

Class 010: hearing protection apparatus for noise reduction, namely, ear plugs, ear bands, ear muffs

 

And/or

 

Class 020:  Non-metal guard rails

 

 

Guidelines to Amending the Identification of Goods

 

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

 

The application identifies goods 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 goods and/or 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 fee already paid (view the USPTO’s current fee schedule).  The application identifies goods and/or services that are classified in at least 4 classes; however, applicant submitted a fee sufficient for only 1 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.

 

 

Advisory:  Information for TEAS Plus and TEAS RF Applicants

 

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.  

 

 

If applicant has questions about its application or needs assistance in responding to this Office action, please telephone the assigned trademark examining attorney.

 

 

 

/Kathleen Lorenzo/

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 109

(571) 272-5883

kathleen.lorenzo@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 5/22/2019 FOR U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 88326149

 

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 5/22/2019 (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.