Suspension Letter

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

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

 

 

 

SUSPENSION NOTICE

No Response Required

 

 

Issue date:  March 09, 2020

 

 

This suspension letter is in response to applicant’s communication filed on February 18, 2020.

 

The application is suspended for the reason(s) specified below.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.67; TMEP §§716 et seq. 

 

The pending application(s) below has an earlier filing date or effective filing date than applicant’s application.  If the mark in the application(s) below registers, the USPTO may refuse registration of applicant’s mark under Section 2(d) because of a likelihood of confusion with the registered mark(s). 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see 37 C.F.R. §2.83; TMEP §§1208.02(c). Action on this application is suspended until the prior-filed application(s) below either registers or abandons.  37 C.F.R. §2.83(c).  Information relevant to the application(s) below was sent previously.

 

          - U.S. Application Serial No(s). 86913265 and 86914093

 

Refusal(s) and/or requirement(s) resolved and maintained and continued.  The following requirement(s) is satisfied: 

 

•      Disclaimer Required

 

See TMEP §713.02.

 

The following refusal(s) is maintained and continued: 

 

•      Section 2(d) Refusal – Likelihood of Confusion

o   Applicant’s arguments in response to the Section 2(d) Refusal have been considered and found unpersuasive.  Specifically, applicant argues that the marks at issue are different, and the goods in U.S. Reg. No. 4856499 are unrelated. The trademark examining counters that the registered marks are the foreign equivalent of the applied-for mark.  Thus, despite the dissimilarities in sound and appearance, the marks share a similar commercial impression because they have the same meaning. 

 

Furthermore, the evidence of record demonstrates that the goods of the parties are identical, legally identical, and closely related.  As stated in the previous Office action, where the goods and/or services of an applicant and registrant are identical or virtually identical, the degree of similarity between the marks required to support a finding that confusion is likely declines.  See Cai v. Diamond Hong, Inc., 901 F.3d 1367, 1373, 127 USPQ2d 1797, 1801 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (quoting In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1363, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012)); TMEP §1207.01(b).  Similarly, where the goods and/or services of an applicant and registrant are “similar in kind and/or closely related,” the degree of similarity between the marks required to support a finding of likelihood of confusion is not as great as in the case of diverse goods and/or services.  In re J.M. Originals Inc., 6 USPQ2d 1393, 1394 (TTAB 1987); see Shen Mfg. Co. v. Ritz Hotel Ltd., 393 F.3d 1238, 1242, 73 USPQ2d 1350, 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2004); TMEP §1207.01(b).

 

Accordingly, consumers are likely to assume a connection between the parties because the marks share the same meaning and identify identical, legally identical, and closely related goods.

 

Based on the foregoing, the refusal to register the mark under Trademark Act Section 2(d) is MAINTAINED and CONTINUED.

 

See id.  This refusal(s) will be made final once this application is removed from suspension, unless a new issue arises.  See TMEP §716.01.

 

Suspension process.  The USPTO will periodically check this application to determine if it should remain suspended.  See TMEP §716.04.  As needed, the trademark examining attorney will issue a letter to applicant to inquire about the status of the reason for the suspension.  TMEP §716.05. 

 

No response required.  Applicant may file a response, but is not required to do so. 

 

 

/Chioma (Bata) Oputa/

Examining Attorney

Law Office 103

571-272-5234

chioma.oputa@uspto.gov

 

 

 

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on March 09, 2020 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88444481

 

Your trademark application has been reviewed by a trademark examining attorney.  As part of that review, the assigned attorney has issued an official letter.  Please follow the steps below.

 

(1)  Read the official letter.  No response is necessary.

 

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

 

/Chioma (Bata) Oputa/

Examining Attorney

Law Office 103

571-272-5234

chioma.oputa@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).

 

 

 

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.”