Offc Action Outgoing

LEETEL

Wei Yong

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88418179 - LEETEL - N/A

To: Wei Yong (aotumanmark@hotmail.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88418179 - LEETEL - N/A
Sent: July 25, 2019 03:16:37 PM
Sent As: ecom117@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

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

 

U.S. Application Serial No. 88418179

 

Mark:  LEETEL

 

 

 

 

Correspondence Address: 

XIANG YING

LONG HUA; 6-3A1005,YI CHENG ZHONG XIN

SHENZHEN,GUANGDONG

518000

CHINA

 

 

Applicant:  Wei Yong

 

 

 

Reference/Docket No. N/A

 

Correspondence Email Address: 

 aotumanmark@hotmail.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:  July 25, 2019

 

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.

 

Database Search. The trademark examining attorney has searched the Office’s database of registered and pending marks and has found no conflicting marks that would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d).  TMEP §704.02; see 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES:

  • IDENTIFICATIONS REQUIRE AMENDMENT
  • REMOVED FROM TEAS PLUS STATUS: ID REQUIREMENT NOT MET

·       SPECIMEN REFUSED AS MOCKUP: SUBSTITUTE SPECIMEN REQUIRED

  • REQUIREMENT FOR ADDITIONAL SPECIMENS

 

IDENTIFICATIONS REQUIRE AMENDMENT

 

Some of the wording used to describe portions of applicant’s goods and/or services in the identification is indefinite and too broad and could include goods and/or services in other international classes. This wording must be clarified for the reasons listed below.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01.  Applicant must amend this wording to specify the common commercial or generic name of the goods and/or services.  See TMEP §1402.01.  If the goods and/or services have no common commercial or generic name, applicant must describe or explain their nature using clear and succinct language.  See id.

 

  • In class 28, the wording “Athletic protective pads for indicate type and purpose” is indefinite, since it fails to indicate the type and purpose of the athletic pads. It seems applicant erroneously pasted the guiding text into the actual identification.

 

Applicant may substitute and/or select from the following wording, if accurate:

 

  • Class 028: Athletic protective pads for {indicate type and purpose}.

 

Scope Advisory. 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).

 

ID Manual. 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.

 

Partial Abandonment Advisory. If applicant does not respond to this Office action within the six-month period for response, the above-referenced goods in International Class 28 will be deleted from the application. The application will then proceed with the following goods and/or services in International Class(es) 28 only: 

 

  • Class 28: Body-building apparatus; Exercise trampolines; Fishing tackle; Fishing tackle bags; Halloween masks; Infant action crib toys; Infant toys; Inflatable pool toys; Stacking toys; Stress relief exercise toys; Toy action figures; Toy animals; Toy drones; Toy for pets; Water toys.

 

  See 37 C.F.R. §2.65(a)-(a)(1); TMEP §718.02(a).

 

REMOVED FROM TEAS PLUS STATUS: ID REQUIREMENT NOT MET

 

Applicant must submit an additional processing fee of $125 per class because the application as filed did not meet the TEAS Plus application filing requirements.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.6(a)(1)(v), 2.22(a), (c); TMEP §§819.01 et seq., 819.04.  Specifically, applicant failed to meet the application filing requirement requiring that the identification of goods/services be selected from the Manual, with all blanks filled in.

 

The additional fee is required even if applicant later corrects these application requirements.

 

Applicant should also note the following requirement.

 

SPECIMEN REFUSED AS MOCKUP: SUBSTITUTE SPECIMEN REQUIRED

 

Registration is refused because the specimen in International Class 28 appears to consist of a digitally altered image or a mock-up of the mark on the goods or their packaging and does not show the applied-for mark in actual use in commerce.  Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a). 

 

An image of a product or packaging that has been digitally created or otherwise altered to include the mark does not show actual use of the mark in commerce.  See 15 U.S.C. §1127; TMEP §§904.04(a), 904.07(a); cf. In re Chica, Inc., 84 USPQ2d 1845, 1848 (TTAB 2007) (holding that “a mere drawing of the goods with an illustration of how the mark may be displayed” was not an acceptable specimen because it did not show actual use in commerce); In re The Signal Cos., 228 USPQ 956, 957-58 n.4 (TTAB 1986) (noting that a printer’s proof of an advertisement would not be an acceptable specimen because it does not show actual use in commerce).  In addition, a photo of the mark on a label, tag, or piece of paper that appears on applicant’s or a third party’s goods or packaging is generally not acceptable to show applicant’s use of the applied-for mark in commerce.  See 15 U.S.C. §1127; TMEP §§904.03(a), 904.07(a).  Applicant must show the mark on applicant’s own goods or packaging as it is seen by the purchasing public, with goods that have actually been sold or transported in commerce.  See TMEP §904.07(a).

 

In this case, applicant has digitally or physically imposed the applied-for mark on the toy of a third party, on sale here: http://playpenbaby.com/product/flexible-wooden-worm-toy/ .

 

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 goods and/or services identified in the application or amendment to allege use.  15 U.S.C. §1051(a)(1); 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a).  “Use in commerce” means (1) a bona fide use of the applied-for mark in the ordinary course of trade (and not merely to reserve a right in the mark), (2) the mark is placed in any manner on the goods, packaging, tags or labels, or displays of the goods, and (3) the goods are actually sold or transported in commerce.  See 15 U.S.C. §1127.

 

In addition to the examples of specimens in (2) in the above paragraph, examples of specimens for goods also include instruction manuals, containers, and webpages that include a picture or textual description of the goods associated with the mark and the means to order the goods.  See TMEP §§904.03 et seq. 

 

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 or prior to the filing of an amendment to allege use and (b) shows the mark in actual use in commerce for the goods and/or services identified in the application or amendment to allege use.  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 or prior to the filing of the amendment to allege use.”  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, see the Specimen webpage.

 

REQUIREMENT FOR ADDITIONAL SPECIMENS

 

Given the wide range of goods identified in the application, and the nature of the specimens of record, the examining attorney requires additional specimens of use in this case to allow for a complete and accurate examination, and to assess the registrability of the applied-for mark.  37 C.F.R. §§2.56(a), 2.61(b), 2.86(a)(3); TMEP §§814, 904.01(a), 1402.03. 

 

The applicant must provide at least one specimen from each of the following groups of goods:

  1. Athletic protective pads for indicate type and purpose; Body-building apparatus; Exercise trampolines;
  2. Fishing tackle; Fishing tackle bags;
  3. Halloween masks; Infant action crib toys; Infant toys; Inflatable pool toys; Stacking toys; Stress relief exercise toys; Toy action figures; Toy animals; Toy drones; Toy for pets; Water toys

That is, the applicant is expected to provide at least 3 different specimens showing at least one good from each grouping noted above.

 If applicant is unable to provide specimens to support use of one or more categories of goods, the applicant must delete these entries, or amend the filing basis for those goods that were not in use as of the application filing date to an intent to use basis under Section 1(b) This option will later necessitate additional fees and filing requirements such as providing a specimen for these goods at a subsequent date.

Failure to provide the required additional specimens is grounds for refusing registration.  In re Harley, 119 USPQ2d 1755, 1757-58 (TTAB 2016); TMEP §814.

 

Response guidelines.  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.

 

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 refusal(s) and/or requirement(s) 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 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  

 

 

/Joseph Becker/

Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 117

United States PTO

(571) 270-5493

Joseph.Becker1@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. 88418179 - LEETEL - N/A

To: Wei Yong (aotumanmark@hotmail.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88418179 - LEETEL - N/A
Sent: July 25, 2019 03:16:39 PM
Sent As: ecom117@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on July 25, 2019 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88418179

 

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. 

 

 

/Joseph Becker/

Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 117

United States PTO

(571) 270-5493

Joseph.Becker1@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 July 25, 2019, 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