To: | InVue Security Products Inc. (trentkirk@invue.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88453017 - LIVE - T1039/US |
Sent: | August 26, 2019 01:12:17 PM |
Sent As: | ecom104@uspto.gov |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 Attachment - 5 Attachment - 6 Attachment - 7 Attachment - 8 Attachment - 9 Attachment - 10 Attachment - 11 Attachment - 12 Attachment - 13 Attachment - 14 Attachment - 15 Attachment - 16 Attachment - 17 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88453017
Mark: LIVE
|
|
Correspondence Address:
|
|
Applicant: InVue Security Products Inc.
|
|
Reference/Docket No. T1039/US
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.
Issue date: August 26, 2019
SEARCH OF OFFICE’S DATABASE OF MARKS
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).
SECTION 2(e)(1) REFUSAL - MERELY DESCRIPTIVE
Here, the applicant has applied for LIVE for use in connection with “security devices for consumer products in a retail store; downloadable software for managing security devices for consumer products within a retail store and for data analytics regarding consumer products and security devices for said consumer products” in Class 9 and “Providing online non-downloadable software for managing security devices for consumer products within a retail store and for data analytics regarding consumer products and security devices for said consumer products; software as a service (SAAS) services featuring software for managing security devices for consumer products within a retail store and for data analytics regarding consumer products and security devices for said consumer products” in Class 42.
“Whether consumers could guess what the product [or service] is from consideration of the mark alone is not the test.” In re Am. Greetings Corp., 226 USPQ 365, 366 (TTAB 1985).
The attached evidence from American Heritage Dictionary states that the relevant definition of the wording “LIVE” is “at the actual time of occurrence.” See attached evidence from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/live.
Further, the attached evidence demonstrates use of the wording “LIVE” in connection with security devices. See attached evidence from http://tat.en.alibaba.com/product/60111499803-221666589/Secure_live_merchandise_display_locking_security_display_hooks_with_price_tag.html; http://www.halometrics.com/Products/ProductsCategories_Display%20Security_787.aspx; and http://www.specialtystoreservices.com/productchild.aspx?productid=10794&group=7020&img=7020.jpg.
Finally, the attached evidence from applicant’s website demonstrates use of the wording “LIVE” to describe the function or purpose of the security software goods and services. See attached evidence from http://invue.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/IRStoplok_w_FlexLockHook_Sell-Sheet_FA_082714-1.pdf.
Therefore, the applied-for mark merely describes security devices and security software for use in connection with live merchandise.
For purposes of evaluating a trademark, material obtained from the Internet is generally accepted as competent evidence. See In re Bayer Aktiengesellschaft, 488 F.3d 960, 966, 82 USPQ2d 1828, 1833 (Fed. Cir. 2007); In re Reed Elsevier Props., Inc., 482 F.3d 1376, 1380, 82 USPQ2d 1378, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2007); TBMP §1208.03; TMEP §710.01(b).
Thus as the applied for mark merely describes a characteristic, purpose, or function of the applicant’s goods and services, the applied-for mark is refused registration on the Principal Register under Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1).
ADVISORY – SUPPLEMENTAL REGISTER
If applicant files an acceptable allegation of use and also amends to the Supplemental Register, the application effective filing date will be the date applicant met the minimum filing requirements under 37 C.F.R. §2.76(c) for an amendment to allege use. TMEP §§816.02, 1102.03; see 37 C.F.R. §2.75(b). In addition, the undersigned trademark examining attorney will conduct a new search of the USPTO records for conflicting marks based on the later application filing date. TMEP §§206.01, 1102.03.
IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS AND SERVICES
Further, the following suggested identification contains further guidance in bold and/or brackets. Applicant may adopt any or all of the suggestions in bold and/or brackets so long as they are accurate. Applicant should note that the brackets indicate where applicant must insert specific types of goods or services. The braces should NOT appear in the amended identification; only the specific goods or services inserted by applicant. Applicant need not amend identifications other than where specified.
Applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate:
Class 9: Security devices in the nature of [further clarify common commercial name of goods, e.g., electronic security tags and labels] for consumer products in a retail store; downloadable software for managing security devices for consumer products within a retail store and for data analytics regarding consumer products and security devices for said consumer products.
Class 42: Providing online non-downloadable software for managing security devices for consumer products within a retail store and for data analytics regarding consumer products and security devices for said consumer products; software as a service (SAAS) services featuring software for managing security devices for consumer products within a retail store and for data analytics regarding consumer products and security devices for said consumer products.
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.
ATTORNEY BAR INFORMATION AND ATTESTATION REQUIRED
QUESTIONS
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
/Andrew Crowder-Schaefer/
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 104
(571) 272-0087
andrew.crowderschaefer@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE