Offc Action Outgoing

FRIESLING

CRL Partnership

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88411839 - FRIESLING - R2227-01801

To: CRL Partnership (masteiner@duanemorris.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88411839 - FRIESLING - R2227-01801
Sent: February 12, 2020 05:01:49 PM
Sent As: ecom110@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application

 

U.S. Application Serial No. 88411839

 

Mark:  FRIESLING

 

 

 

 

Correspondence Address: 

Mark A. Steiner, Esq.

Duane Morris LLP

Spear Tower - Suite 2200

One Market Plaza

San Francisco CA 94105-1127

 

 

Applicant:  CRL Partnership

 

 

 

Reference/Docket No. R2227-01801

 

Correspondence Email Address: 

 masteiner@duanemorris.com

 

 

 

NONFINAL OFFICE ACTION

 

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:  February 12, 2020

 

 

 

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.  

 

 

 

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.  This letter is in response to the applicant’s communication filed on January 21, 2020.

 

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES:

 

  • Partial Identification of Goods
  • Section 2(e)1 Refusal – Maintained and Continued
  • Request for Information – Maintained and Continued

 

 

THIS PARTIAL REQUIREMENT APPLIES TO CLASSES 32 AND 33 ONLY

 

 

IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS

 

 

The wording “Non-alcoholic beverages, namely, wine-flavored slushy drinks” in Class 32 and “Alcoholic beverages, namely, slushy drinks prepared with wine and distilled spirits” in Class 33 in the identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified because both sets of goods require further specification and clarity.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01.  The applicant must amend the wording “slushy drinks” in both identifications, as well as clarify the discrepancy of wine flavored drinks in Class 32 being described as “non-alcoholic”. 

 

Applicant may substitute the following wording, in bold, if accurate: 

 

 

Non-alcoholic beverages, namely, alcohol free wine-flavored based drinks.  IC 32

 

 

Alcoholic beverages, namely, wine-based drinks; Prepared cocktails consisting primarily of distilled spirits.  IC 33

 

 

Applicant may amend the identification to clarify or limit the goods and/or services, but not to broaden or expand the goods and/or services 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 and/or services 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.

 

 

THIS PARTIAL REFUSAL APPLIES TO CLASSES 21, 32, and 33 ONLY

 

 

SECTION 2(e)(1) REFUSAL - MERELY DESCRIPTIVE

 

Registration was refused because the applied-for mark merely describes a feature or characteristic of applicant’s goods.  Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); see TMEP §§1209.01(b), 1209.03 et seq.

 

 

The applicant argues that the examining attorney has not presented evidence that the consuming public would recognize the proposed mark FRIESLING to refer to alcoholic beverages consisting of frozen Riesling wine.  The applicant also contends that the proposed mark would not give consumers any insight as to the nature of the goods.  The applicant concludes that the mark is suggestive.

 

 

The examining attorney is not persuaded by these arguments.  The examining attorney had previously attached Internet evidence which demonstrated the use of FRIESLING in reference to frozen Riesling beverages.  As outlined below, the applicant is now required to provide additional information pertaining to applied for goods.

 

 

The refusal to register under Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1) is continued and maintained. 

 

 

INFORMATION ABOUT GOODS/SERVICES REQUIRED

 

 

To permit proper examination of the application, applicant must submit additional product information about applicant’s goods in Classes 21, 32 and 33.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b); TMEP §814.  The requested product information should include fact sheets, instruction manuals, and/or advertisements.  If these materials are unavailable, applicant should submit similar documentation for goods of the same type, explaining how its own product will differ.  If the goods feature new technology and no competing goods are available, applicant must provide a detailed description of the goods. In particular, the applicant must also indicate if the goods in Classes 32 and 33 contain in any amount, Riesling wine.

 

Factual information about the goods must clearly indicate how they operate, their salient features, and their prospective customers and channels of trade.  Conclusory statements regarding the goods will not satisfy this requirement.

 

Failure to comply with a request for information is grounds for refusing registration.  In re Harley, 119 USPQ2d 1755, 1757-58 (TTAB 2016); TMEP §814.  Merely stating that information about the goods is available on applicant’s website is an insufficient response and will not make the relevant information of record.  See In re Planalytics, Inc., 70 USPQ2d 1453, 1457-58 (TTAB 2004).

 

 

RESPONSE GUIDELINES

 

 

For this application to proceed, applicant must explicitly address each 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.

 

Please call or email the assigned trademark examining attorney with questions about this Office action.  Although the trademark examining attorney cannot provide legal advice or statements about applicant’s rights, the trademark examining attorney can provide applicant with additional explanation about the requirements in this Office action.  See TMEP §§705.02, 709.06.  Although the USPTO does not accept emails as responses to Office actions, emails can be used for informal communications and will be included in the application record.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(c), 2.191; TMEP §§304.01-.02, 709.04-.05. 

 

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.  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.    

 

 

/Sanjeev K. Vohra

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 110

571.272.5885 - Work

571.273.5885 - Fax

sanjeev.vohra@uspto.gov

 

 

RESPONSE GUIDANCE

  • Missing the response deadline to this letter will cause the application to abandon.  A response or notice of appeal must be received by the USPTO before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  TEAS and ESTTA maintenance or unforeseen circumstances could affect an applicant’s ability to timely respond.  

 

 

 

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88411839 - FRIESLING - R2227-01801

To: CRL Partnership (masteiner@duanemorris.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88411839 - FRIESLING - R2227-01801
Sent: February 12, 2020 05:01:50 PM
Sent As: ecom110@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on February 12, 2020 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88411839

 

Your trademark application has been reviewed by a trademark examining attorney.  As part of that review, the assigned attorney has issued an official letter that you must respond to by the specified deadline or your application will be abandoned.  Please follow the steps below.

 

(1)  Read the official letter.

 

(2)  Direct questions about the contents of the Office action to the assigned attorney below. 

 

 

/Sanjeev K. Vohra

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 110

571.272.5885 - Work

571.273.5885 - Fax

sanjeev.vohra@uspto.gov

 

Direct questions about navigating USPTO electronic forms, the USPTO website, the application process, the status of your application, and/or whether there are outstanding deadlines or documents related to your file to the Trademark Assistance Center (TAC).

 

(3)  Respond within 6 months (or earlier, if required in the Office action) from February 12, 2020, using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS).  The response must be received by the USPTO before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  See the Office action for more information about how to respond

 

 

 

GENERAL GUIDANCE

·         Check the status of your application periodically in the Trademark Status & Document Retrieval (TSDR) database to avoid missing critical deadlines.

 

·         Update your correspondence email address, if needed, to ensure you receive important USPTO notices about your application.

 

·         Beware of misleading notices sent by private companies about your application.  Private companies not associated with the USPTO use public information available in trademark registrations to mail and email trademark-related offers and notices – most of which require fees.  All official USPTO correspondence will only be emailed from the domain “@uspto.gov.”

 

 

 


uspto.report is an independent third-party trademark research tool that is not affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or any other governmental organization. The information provided by uspto.report is based on publicly available data at the time of writing and is intended for informational purposes only.

While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information displayed on this site. The use of this site is at your own risk. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

All official trademark data, including owner information, should be verified by visiting the official USPTO website at www.uspto.gov. This site is not intended to replace professional legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for consulting with a legal professional who is knowledgeable about trademark law.

© 2024 USPTO.report | Privacy Policy | Resources | RSS Feed of Trademarks | Trademark Filings Twitter Feed