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: 4/24/2019

 

Introduction:

 

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

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES:

 

• Likelihood of Confusion/pending applications;
• Identification of goods;
• Character refusal advisory.

Likelihood of Confusion:

The applicant applied to register the mark: GLYPH for apparatus for recording, transmission, processing, and reproduction of sound, images, or data; digital media; audio books; audio and visual recordings; video game software; computer programs and software; downloadable electronic publications; downloadable game software; downloadable mobile applications; consumer electronics and accessories therefor; eyeglasses and sunglasses and accessories therefor; binoculars; decorative magnets; graduated rulers; microphones; helmets; flotation vests; protective face masks not for medical purposes; snorkels; swimming goggles; swim masks  in Int. Class 9.

Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the mark(s) in U.S. Registration Nos.:

4003180 for GLYPHX for video game software, computer game software and instruction manuals sold therewith; electronic game programs in Int. class 9;

3903266 for HEROGLYPH for computer software, namely, video editing software, 2D and 3D compositing programs as well as computer software for the presentation of video titling and for editing and optimizing media sources, computer animation programs, namely, 2D and 3D animation programs in Int. class 9;

4299149 for GLYPH for computer application software for mobile phones, portable media players, and handheld computers, namely, software for use in commercial transactions where the software securely reduces interchange costs for merchants and increases rewards points for consumers in Int. class 9;

4348126 for KIDGLYPHS for downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for use in language development for children in Int. class 9;

4315604 for G GLYPH PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES for blank digital storage media; computer hardware for upload, storage, retrieval, download, transmission and delivery of digital content in Int. class 9;

5320024 and 5320073 for GLYPH and GLYPH PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES for Blank digital storage media; Computer hardware for upload, storage, retrieval, download, and transmission and delivery of digital content; Apparatus and instruments for sound and image processing, and implementation software for sound and image processing for such apparatus and instruments, namely, CD-ROM drives, CD-ROM recorders, CD and CD-ROM players, digital audio tape machines in the nature of digital audio tape players, digital audio tape recorders, computers, small computer electronic switch interface controllers for controlling such computers, magneto optical disc drives, 8mm blank audio tape data storage units, digital linear tape data storage units, blank fixed and removable computer hard drives, and cassette and reel-to-reel tape recorders for processing sounds and images stored on magnetic decoding discs; blank removable magnetic data carriers; implementation software for sound and image processing for equipment, namely, CD-ROM drives, CD-ROM recorders, CD and CD-ROM players, digital audio tape machines in the nature of digital audio tape players, digital audio tape recorders, computers, electronic small computer switch interface controllers for controlling such computers, magneto optical drives, 8mm blank audio tape data storage units, digital linear tape data storage units, blank fixed and removable computer hard drives, and cassette and reel-to-reel tape recorders; software for audio and musical production, video production; blank hard drives for computers; computer hard drive enclosures; external computer hard drives featuring software for data encryption and electronic storage of data; external computer hard drives; computer storage devices, namely, blank flash drives and external computer hard drives, hard disk drives (HDD); blank hard drives for computers featuring solid state or spinning disks; RAID-based hard drive backup systems; removable hard drive based computer backup systems; computer backup and storage systems with multiple removable RAID cartridges; backup drives for computers; computer application software for managing electronic storage hard drives for computers; computer hardware; computer peripheral devices; computer peripheral equipment; computer cables; blank computer hard drives; blank magnetic computer tapes; blank tapes for storage of computer data; CD drives for computers; CD burners; Computer hard drive enclosures in the nature of cases for external hard drives and disc drives; external mounts for computer hard drives and disc drives; rack mounts for computer hard drives and disc drives; computer application software for managing electronic data storage and encryption of hard drives for computers; computer software for managing the automated maintenance of electronic data storage hard drives in Int. class 9;

4622592 for GLYPH for platform as a service (PAAS) featuring computer software platforms for publishing and hosting computer software applications in Int. class 42;

5049380 for GLYPH for software as a service (SAAS) services featuring software for the transmission and delivery of data for generating online marketing and advertising programs for advertisers to create, manage, publish and share custom interactive content inline and users to engage with the things that are most important and relevant to them via wireless communication networks and the Internet in Int. class 42.

Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the attached registrations.

Similarities in Appearance, Sound, Connotation and Commercial Impression:

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.

In this case, the following factors are the most relevant: similarity of the marks as to the term GLYPH, similarity and nature of the goods and services, and similarity of the trade channels of the goods and/or services.  See In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1361-62, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Dakin’s Miniatures Inc., 59 USPQ2d 1593, 1595-96 (TTAB 1999); TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.

The applicant features the mark “GLYPH” and the registrant’s marks all feature the term GLYPH or a variation of the term in their marks. A consumer seeing these marks together or apart might believe that these marks are related.

 

Although marks are compared in their entireties, one feature of a mark may be more significant or dominant in creating a commercial impression.  See In re Detroit Athletic Co., 903 F.3d 1297, 1305, 128 USPQ2d 1047, 1050 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (citing In re Dixie Rests., 105 F.3d 1405, 1407, 41 USPQ2d 1531, 1533-34 (Fed. Cir. 1997)); TMEP §1207.01(b)(viii), (c)(ii).  Greater weight is often given to this dominant feature when determining whether marks are confusingly similar.  See In re Detroit Athletic Co., 903 F.3d at 1305, 128 USPQ2d at 1050 (citing In re Dixie Rests., 105 F.3d at 1407, 41 USPQ2d at 1533-34).

 

Marks must be compared in their entireties and should not be dissected; however, a trademark examining attorney may weigh the individual components of a mark to determine its overall commercial impression.  In re Detroit Athletic Co., 903 F.3d 1297, 1305, 128 USPQ2d 1047, 1050 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (“[Regarding the issue of confusion,] there is nothing improper in stating that . . . more or less weight has been given to a particular feature of a mark, provided the ultimate conclusion rests on consideration of the marks in their entireties.” (quoting In re Nat’l Data Corp., 753 F.2d 1056, 1058, 224 USPQ 749, 751 (Fed. Cir. 1985)). 

Goods/Services:

The applicant features apparatus for recording, transmission, processing, and reproduction of sound, images, or data; digital media; audio books; audio and visual recordings; video game software; computer programs and software; downloadable electronic publications; downloadable game software; downloadable mobile applications; consumer electronics and accessories therefor; eyeglasses and sunglasses and accessories therefor; binoculars; decorative magnets; graduated rulers; microphones; helmets; flotation vests; protective face masks not for medical purposes; snorkels; swimming goggles; swim masks in Int. class 9. The registrants feature a variety of goods and services.

Determining likelihood of confusion is based on the description of the goods and/or services stated in the application and registration at issue, not on extrinsic evidence of actual use.  See In re Detroit Athletic Co., 903 F.3d 1297, 1307, 128 USPQ2d 1047, 1052 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (citing In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1325, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1749 (Fed. Cir. 2017)).  

 

In this case, the application uses broad wording to describe  digital media; audio books; audio and visual recordings; computer programs and software; downloadable electronic publications; downloadable game software; downloadable mobile applications; consumer electronics and accessories therefor, which presumably encompasses all goods and services of the type described, including registrant’s more narrow goods and services.  See, e.g., In re Solid State Design Inc., 125 USPQ2d 1409, 1412-15 (TTAB 2018); Sw. Mgmt., Inc. v. Ocinomled, Ltd., 115 USPQ2d 1007, 1025 (TTAB 2015).  Thus, applicant’s and registrant’s goods and/or services are legally identical or related.  See, e.g., In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 127 USPQ2d 1627, 1629 (TTAB 2018) (citing Tuxedo Monopoly, Inc. v.Gen. Mills Fun Grp., Inc., 648 F.2d 1335, 1336, 209 USPQ 986, 988 (C.C.P.A. 1981); Inter IKEA Sys. B.V. v. Akea, LLC, 110 USPQ2d 1734, 1745 (TTAB 2014); Baseball Am. Inc. v. Powerplay Sports Ltd., 71 USPQ2d 1844, 1847 n.9 (TTAB 2004)).

 

Additionally, the goods and/or services of the parties have no restrictions as to nature, type, channels of trade, or classes of purchasers and are “presumed to travel in the same channels of trade to the same class of purchasers.”  In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Packard Press, Inc., 281 F.3d 1261, 1268, 62 USPQ2d 1001, 1005 (Fed. Cir. 2002)).  Thus, applicant’s and registrant’s goods and/or services are related.

 

Pending:

 

Information regarding pending Application Serial Nos. 87144801; 87144835; 87149636; 87149738; 87149744; and 87149750 are enclosed. The effective filing date of the referenced application precedes applicant’s filing date.  There may be a likelihood of confusion between the two marks under Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).  If the referenced application registers, registration may be refused in this case under Section 2(d).  37 C.F.R. §2.83; TMEP §§1208 et seq.  Therefore, upon entry of a response to this Office action, action on this case may be suspended pending final disposition of the earlier-filed application.

 

If applicant believes there is no potential conflict between this application and the earlier-filed application, then applicant may present arguments relevant to the issue in a response to this Office action.  The election not to submit arguments at this time in no way limits applicant’s right to address this issue at a later point.

 

Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal(s) by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.

 

Other Informalities:

If the applicant chooses to respond to the refusal to register, the applicant must also respond to the following informalities.

Identification of Goods:

 

The identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified because further specification and information is required.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01. 

 

The identification for computer software in International Class 9 is indefinite and must be clarified.

Software can be classified in three international classes (International Classes 9, 41, and 42) depending on whether the software is recorded on media, downloadable, or non-downloadable (either online or for temporary use), and if non-downloadable, whether it is game software.  For information regarding proper classification of computer software, see TMEP §§1402.03(d), 1402.11(a)(xii), and the USPTO’s online U.S. Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual.

 

The USPTO requires specificity in identifying computer software in order for a trademark examining attorney to examine the application properly and make appropriate decisions concerning possible conflicts between the applicant’s mark and other marks.  See In re N.A.D. Inc., 57 USPQ2d 1872, 1874 (TTAB 2000); TMEP §1402.03(d).

 

The identification for “accessories therefor” in International Class 9 is indefinite and too broad and must be clarified because this wording does not make clear the nature of the type of accessory and could include goods in more than one international class.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03(a).  For example, the accessories could go into any number of classes.  Applicant must either (1) specify the common commercial or generic name for each accessory item, or (2) delete this wording from the identification.  See TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03(a).  

 

Applicant may adopt the following identification, if accurate: 

 

International Class 9:

 

Apparatus for recording, transmission, processing, and reproduction of sound, images, or data; digital media; audio books in the field of {indicate subject matter}; visual and audio recordings featuring {indicate subject matter}; recorded video game software; computer programs and software recorded, for {specify the function of the programs, e.g., use in database management, use in electronic storage of data, etc.}; downloadable electronic publications in the nature of {indicate specific nature of publication} in the field of {indicate subject matter of publication}; downloadable electronic game software for use on {specify, e.g., mobile and cellular phones, handheld computers, etc.}; downloadable mobile applications for {indicate function of software, e.g., managing bank accounts, editing photos, making restaurant reservations, etc. and, if software is content- or field-specific, the content or field of use}; consumer electronics and accessories therefor, namely, (list the common commercial name of the goods and accessories); eyeglasses and sunglasses and accessories therefor, namely, cases for spectacles and sunglasses, and sunglass chains and cords; binoculars; decorative magnets; graduated rulers; microphones; {Indicate type of helmet} helmets; flotation vests; protective face masks not for medical purposes; snorkels; swimming goggles; swim masks.

 

For assistance regarding an acceptable listing of goods and/or services, please see the on-line searchable Manual of Acceptable Identifications of Goods and Services, at http://www.gov.uspto.report/web/offices/tac/doc/gsmanual/.

 

Recitation and Identification Amendment Advisory:

 

Please note that, while the identification of goods may be amended to clarify or limit the goods, adding to the goods or broadening the scope of the goods is not permitted.  37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06.  Therefore, applicant may not amend the identification to include goods that are not within the scope of the goods set forth in the present identification.

 

If applicant prosecutes this application as a combined, or multiple-class application, then applicant must comply with each of the following for those goods and/or services based on an intent to use the mark in commerce under Trademark Act Section 1(b)

 

Applicant must list the goods and/or services by international class with the classes listed in ascending numerical order.  TMEP § 1403.01; and

 

Applicant must submit a filing fee for each international class of goods and/or services not covered by the fee already paid.  37 C.F.R. §2.86(a)(2); TMEP §§810.01 and 1403.01.

 

Character Refusal Advisory:

 

Applicant is advised that, upon consideration of an allegation of use, registration may be refused on the ground that the applied-for mark, as used on the specimen of record, serves to identify only the name of a particular character and as such, does not function as a trademark or service mark to identify and distinguish applicant’s goods and/or services from those of others and to indicate the source of applicant’s goods and/or services.  Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, 3 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051-1053, 1127; see In re Caserta, 46 USPQ2d 1088 (TTAB 1998); In re Hechinger Inv. Co. of Del., 24 USPQ2d 1057, 1059 (TTAB 1991); In re McDonald’s Corp., 229 USPQ 555, 555 (TTAB 1985); TMEP §§904.07(b), 1202.10, 1301.02(b).

 

The name of a character is registrable as a trademark or service mark only where the record shows that it is used in a manner that would be perceived by consumers as identifying the goods and/or services in addition to identifying the character.  In re Caserta, 46 USPQ2d at 1090; In re Fla. Cypress Gardens Inc., 208 USPQ 288, 292 (TTAB 1980); see TMEP §§1202.10, 1301.02(b). 

 

Questions:

 

Applicant is encouraged to call or email the assigned trademark examining attorney below to resolve the issues in this Office action.  Although the USPTO will not accept an email as a response to an Office action, an applicant can communicate by phone or email to agree to a proposed amendment to the application that will immediately place the application in condition for publication, registration, or suspension.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.62(c); TMEP §707.

 

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.  

 

 

 

/LDA/

Lourdes Ayala, Attorney at Law

Law Office 106

Telephone Number 571-272-9316

Lourdes.Ayala@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 4/24/2019 FOR U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 88370336

 

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 4/24/2019 (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.