| To: | Miller, Cindy (mackedboutique@gmail.com) |
| Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88409392 - ISLANDER - N/A |
| Sent: | July 19, 2019 09:05:25 PM |
| Sent As: | ecom118@uspto.gov |
| Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 Attachment - 5 Attachment - 6 Attachment - 7 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
|
U.S. Application Serial No. 88409392
Mark: ISLANDER
|
|
|
Correspondence Address:
|
|
|
Applicant: Miller, Cindy
|
|
|
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.
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.
Summary of Issues Applicant Must Address
(1) Refusal under Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45 – Unacceptable Specimen;
(2) Requirement to Clarify Owner of Application;
(3) Requirement to Submit New Drawing;
(4) Requirement to Delete “TM” Symbol From Drawing;
(5) Requirement to Amend Mark Description;
(6) Requirement to Delete Color Claim Statement; and
(7) Requirement to Disclaim Pictorial Representation of Long Island, New York in Mark
The examining attorney has searched the Office records and has found no similar registered or pending mark which would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d). TMEP §704.02.
However, the applicant must respond to the following refusal.
Refusal – Unacceptable Specimen
Specifically, the specimen photograph merely shows the mark applied to a t-shirt rather than showing the mark used to promote and advertise the identified “silk screen printing” services. Therefore, consumers will not perceive the proposed mark as an indication of source for these services.
As noted by the attached Internet printout from the online searchable Manual of Acceptable Identifications of Goods and Services, silk screen printing “is a printing service; it should not be used to identify the specific items being silkscreened, e.g., t-shirts, which are goods in Class 25”. Material obtained from the Internet is accepted as competent evidence in trademark examination. See In re Jonathan Drew Inc., 97 USPQ2d 1640, 1641-42 (TTAB 2011); In re Davey Prods. Pty Ltd., 92 USPQ2d 1198, 1202-03 (TTAB 2009); In re Leonhardt, 109 USPQ2d 2091, 2098 (TTAB 2008); TBMP §1208.03; TMEP §710.01(b).
An application based on Trademark Act Section 1(a) must include a specimen showing the applied-for mark in use in commerce for each international class of services identified in the application. 15 U.S.C. §1051(a)(1); 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a).
Examples of specimens for services include advertising and marketing materials, brochures, photographs of business signage and billboards, and webpages that show the mark used in the actual sale, rendering, or advertising of the services. See TMEP §1301.04(a), (h)(iv)(C). Specimens comprising advertising and promotional materials must show a direct association between the mark and the services. TMEP §1301.04(f)(ii).
Applicant may respond to this refusal by satisfying one of the following for each applicable international class:
(1) Submit a different specimen (a verified “substitute” specimen) that (a) was in actual use in commerce at least as early as the filing date of the application and (b) shows the mark in actual use in commerce for the services identified in the application. A “verified substitute specimen” is a specimen that is accompanied by the following statement made in a signed affidavit or supported by a declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20: “The substitute (or new, or originally submitted, if appropriate) specimen(s) was/were in use in commerce at least as early as the filing date of the application.” The substitute specimen cannot be accepted without this statement.
(2) Amend the filing basis to intent to use under Section 1(b), for which no specimen is required. This option will later necessitate additional fee(s) and filing requirements such as providing a specimen.
For an overview of both response options referenced above and instructions on how to satisfy either option online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, please go to http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/law/specimen.jsp.
Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.
If applicant responds to the refusal, applicant must also respond to the requirements set forth below.
Applicant’s entity type is specified inconsistently in the application, and clarification is required. The name of an individual person appears in the “Applicant’s Name” section of the application, but the entity type is set forth as a limited liability company. TMEP §803.03.
If applicant is an individual and the owner of the mark, then applicant may simply request that the entity be amended to “individual” and indicate his/her country of citizenship for the record. 15 U.S.C. §1051(a)(2); 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(3)(i); TMEP §§803.02(a) and 1201.02(c). Alternatively, if applicant is in fact a limited liability company, the correct name of the limited liability company (and U.S. state or foreign country of incorporation or organization) should be set forth. TMEP §803.03(h).
If, in response to the above request, applicant provides information indicating that it is not the owner of the mark, then the trademark examining attorney will refuse registration under Trademark Act Section 1, 15 U.S.C. §1051, because the application was void as filed. Only the owner of a mark may apply to register the mark. TMEP §§803.01, 803.06, and 1201.02(b).
Drawing Does Not Reproduce Satisfactorily
The drawing is not acceptable because it will not create a high quality image when reproduced. See TMEP §807.04(a). Specifically, the drawing shows a vertical line on the right side of the mark and, thus, will not reproduce satisfactorily for publication purposes.
A clear drawing of the mark is an application requirement. 37 C.F.R. §2.52. Therefore, applicant must submit a new drawing showing a clear depiction of the mark. All lines must be clean, sharp and solid, and not fine or crowded. 37 C.F.R. §§2.53(c), 2.54(e); TMEP §§807.05(c), 807.06(a).
To submit a new drawing via the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), applicant must use the response form and follow the instructions regarding submission of a drawing. TMEP §807.05(a); see 37 C.F.R. §2.53(a). An applicant must submit a drawing via TEAS in jpg format, and the USPTO recommends a digitized image with a length and width no smaller than 250 pixels and no larger than 944 pixels. 37 C.F.R. §2.53(c); TMEP §807.05(c).
For drawings submitted on paper, the paper should be approximately 8.5 inches wide by 11 inches long, white, non-shiny, and include the caption “DRAWING PAGE” at the top. 37 C.F.R. §2.54(a)-(c); TMEP §807.06(a). The mark in the drawing must appear no larger than 3.15 inches (8 cm) high by 3.15 inches (8 cm) wide. 37 C.F.R. §2.54(b); TMEP §807.06(a). Further, the drawing must be made with ink or by a process that will provide a high definition when scanned. 37 C.F.R. §2.54(e); TMEP §807.06(a). A photolithographic, printer’s proof copy, or other high-quality reproduction of the mark may be used. 37 C.F.R. §2.54(e); TMEP §807.06(a).
The USPTO will not accept amendments or changes to the applied-for mark shown in a new drawing if the changes would materially alter the mark. 37 C.F.R. §2.72; see TMEP §§807.13 et seq., 807.14.
Deletion of TM Symbol
Applicant must also submit a new drawing with the “TM” symbol deleted from the drawing of the mark; this symbol is not part of the mark and is not registrable. See 37 C.F.R. §2.72; TMEP §807.14(a). Although applicant must delete this matter, applicant may not make any other changes or amendments that would materially alter the drawing of the mark. See 37 C.F.R. §2.72; TMEP §§807.14 et seq. For more information about deleting matter from the drawing, see the Drawing webpage.
Applicant must revise the mark description of record by more accurately describing the literal and design elements in the proposed mark. 37 C.F.R. §2.37; see TMEP §§808.01, 808.02. The following is suggested, if accurate:
The mark consists of the word “ISLANDER” in stylized font within a pictorial representation of Long Island, New York.
Deletion of Color Claim Statement
Inasmuch as the applied-for mark does not show color, applicant must delete the color claim statement of record. TMEP §807.07(e).
Disclaimer
In this case, applicant must disclaim the design of Long Island, New York because it is not inherently distinctive. This unregistrable design at best is primarily geographically descriptive of the origin of applicant’s services. See 15 U.S.C. §§1052(e)(2); In re Societe Generale des Eaux Minerales de Vittel S.A., 824 F.2d 957, 959, 3 USPQ2d 1450, 1451-52 (Fed. Cir. 1987); In re Joint-Stock Co. “Baik”, 80 USPQ2d 1305, 1309 (TTAB 2006); TMEP §§1210.01(a), 1213, 1213.03(a), (c). See the attached sample Internet printout.
An accurate design of geographically descriptive matter and the word or words which describe the design are legal equivalents; therefore, a design must be disclaimed the same as the primarily geographically descriptive wording See In re Can. Dry Ginger Ale, Inc., 86 F.2d 830, 832, 32 USPQ 49, 50 (C.C.P.A. 1936); TMEP §1210.02(a).
The design of Long Island, New York is the legal equivalent of the geographic place or location named Long Island. TMEP §1210.02(a). The attached evidence from the Internet shows that Long Island is a generally known geographic place or location. See TMEP §§1210.02 et seq. The services for which applicant seeks registration originate in this geographic place or location as shown by applicant’s address and website materials. See TMEP §1210.03. See the attached printouts. Because the services originate in this place or location, a public association of the services with the place is presumed. See In re Hollywood Lawyers Online, 110 USPQ2d 1852, 1858 (TTAB 2014) (citing In re Spirits of New Merced, LLC, 85 USPQ2d 1614, 1621 (TTAB 2007)); TMEP §§1210.02(a) 1210.04.
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 design of Long Island, New York 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.
Response Guidelines
For this application to proceed further, applicant must explicitly address each refusal and/or requirement raised in this Office action. If the action includes a refusal, applicant may provide arguments and/or evidence as to why the refusal should be withdrawn and the mark should register. Applicant may also have other options specified in this Office action for responding to a refusal and should consider those options carefully. To respond to requirements and certain refusal response options, applicant should set forth in writing the required changes or statements. For more information and general tips on responding to USPTO Office actions, response options, and how to file a response online, see “Responding to Office Actions” on the USPTO’s website.
Note that use of paper mail would result in applicant losing TEAS Plus status, as outlined above.
If applicant does not respond to this Office action within six months of the issue/mailing date, or responds by expressly abandoning the application, the application process will end and the trademark will fail to register. See 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.65(a), 2.68(a); TMEP §§718.01, 718.02. Additionally, the USPTO will not refund the application filing fee, which is a required processing fee. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.6(a)(1)(i)-(iv), 2.209(a); TMEP §405.04.
When an application has abandoned for failure to respond to an Office action, an applicant may timely file a petition to revive the application, which, if granted, would allow the application to return to active status. See 37 C.F.R. §2.66; TMEP §1714. The petition must be filed within two months of the date of issuance of the notice of abandonment and may be filed online via the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) with a $100 fee. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.6(a)(15)(ii), 2.66(a)(1), (b)(1).
Advisory Regarding E-mail Communications
If applicant has questions regarding this Office action, please telephone or e-mail the assigned trademark examining attorney. All relevant e-mail communications will be placed in the official application record; however, an e-mail communication will not be accepted as a response to this Office action and will not extend the deadline for filing a proper response. See 37 C.F.R. §2.191; TMEP §§709.04-.05. Further, although the trademark examining attorney may provide additional explanation pertaining to the refusal(s) and/or requirement(s) in this Office action, the trademark examining attorney may not provide legal advice or statements about applicant’s rights. See TMEP §§705.02, 709.06.
Applicant May Wish to Seek Trademark Counsel
For attorney referral information, applicant may consult the American Bar Association’s Consumers’ Guide to Legal Help; an online directory of legal professionals, such as FindLaw®; or a local telephone directory. The USPTO, however, may not assist an applicant in the selection of a private attorney. 37 C.F.R. §2.11.
Miscellaneous
If applicant has questions about its application or needs assistance in responding to this Office action, please telephone the assigned trademark examining attorney directly at the number below.
How to respond. Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action
/David Yontef/
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 118
(571) 272-8274
david.yontef@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE
