To: | LILY FAN (ALPHATUNG@163.COM) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88358284 - EGGCELLENT - N/A |
Sent: | August 06, 2019 12:54:40 PM |
Sent As: | ecom120@uspto.gov |
Attachments: |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88358284
Mark: EGGCELLENT
|
|
Correspondence Address: |
|
Applicant: LILY FAN
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N/A
Correspondence Email Address: |
|
The USPTO must receive applicant’s response to this letter within six months of the issue date below or the application will be abandoned. Respond using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS). A link to the appropriate TEAS response form appears at the end of this Office action.
Issue date: August 06, 2019
This Office action is supplemental to and supersedes the previous Office actions issued on July 15, 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 requirement: Amendment to Identification of goods. See TMEP §§706, 711.02.
In a previous Office actions dated June 14, 2019 and July 8, 2019, the trademark examining attorney refused registration of the applied-for mark based on the following: Trademark Act Section 2(d) for a likelihood of confusion with a registered mark. In addition, applicant was required to satisfy the following requirement(s): amend the identification to a good with the scope of the original Identification of Goods
Based on applicant’s response, Applicant must address all issue(s) raised in this Office action, in addition to the issues raised in the Office action dated June 14, 2019 and July 8, 2019.
The issue raised in the previous June 14, 2019 and July 8, 2019, Office action is/are as follow and is/are maintained: the Section 2(d) likelihood of confusion refusal
The following is a SUMMARY OF ISSUES that applicant must address:
• NEW ISSUE: Amendment to Identification of Goods
• NEW ISSUE: U.S.-Licensed Attorney Required
AMENDMENT TO IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS
In this case, the application originally identified the goods as follows: “Pet food; Pet treats in the nature of bully sticks; Edible pet treats; Edible organic pet treats for chickens, flocks, dogs, cats, cattles, horses, wild birds, poultry, hedgehogs, and reptiles; Edible vegan pet treats for chickens, dogs, cats, cattles, horses, wild birds, poultry, hedgehogs, and reptiles; Pre-baked edible pet treats.”
However, the proposed amendment identifies the following goods: “Edible organic foodstuffs for animal consumption, namely, wild birds and poultry.”
This portion of the proposed amendment is beyond the scope of the original identification because applicant original goods were limited to pet treats, and pet foods. The terms “foodstuffs for animal consumption” is broad enough to include food for animals that are not pets.
Applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate:
International Class 31: Edible organic pet food for wild birds and poultry
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.
APPLICANT MUST BE REPRESENTED BY A U.S. - LICENSED ATTORNEY
The application record indicates that applicant’s domicile is outside of the United States in China, but no attorney who is an active member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of a U.S. State or territory has been appointed to represent the applicant in this matter. All applicants whose permanent legal residence or principal place of business is not within the United States or its territories must be represented by a U.S.-licensed attorney at the USPTO. 37 C.F.R. §§2.2(o), 2.11(a). Thus, applicant is required to be represented by a U.S.-licensed attorney and must appoint one. 37 C.F.R. §2.11(a). This application will not proceed to registration without such appointment and representation. See id. See Hiring a U.S.-licensed trademark attorney for more information.
To appoint or designate a U.S.-licensed attorney. To appoint an attorney, applicant should (1) submit a completed Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) Revocation, Appointment, and/or Change of Address of Attorney/Domestic Representative form and (2) promptly notify the trademark examining attorney that this TEAS form was submitted. Alternatively, if applicant has already retained an attorney, the attorney can respond to this Office action by using the appropriate TEAS response form and provide his or her attorney information in the form and sign it as applicant’s attorney. See 37 C.F.R. §2.17(b)(1)(ii).
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.
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.
How to respond. Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action
/Kara E. Jackson/
Kara E. Jackson
Examining Attorney
Law Office 120
(571)272-4358
Kara.Jackson@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE