To: | Smart Industries Corporation (patatty@ipmvs.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88454703 - TICKET RING - T58804US00 |
Sent: | September 04, 2019 06:59:59 PM |
Sent As: | ecom102@uspto.gov |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88454703
Mark: TICKET RING
|
|
Correspondence Address: MCKEE, VOORHEES & SEASE, P.L.C.
|
|
Applicant: Smart Industries Corporation
|
|
Reference/Docket No. T58804US00
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: September 04, 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).
1. SECTION 2(e)(1) REFUSAL - MERELY DESCRIPTIVE
In the instant case, applicant seeks registration of TICKET RING for arcade games in International Class 28.
In this case, TICKET RING is clearly descriptive of a feature of applicant’s goods. The specimen submitted by applicant shows what appears to be rings of tickets behind the wording ticket ring. A review of applicant’s website (http://primetimeamusements.com/product/ticket-ring/#&gid=1&pid=1) shows that applicant describes the game as “[a] Ticket Redemption Machine Disguised As A Crane Game.” A more detailed description on that page states that:
Ticket Ring uses a similar design to the aforementioned Ticket Time cranes, but slightly changes what you play for. Instead of playing for actual rolls of tickets, users attempt to grab large rings that have different ticket values encoded into them. Once obtained, take the ring to the location’s redemption desk to redeem for physical or e-tickets to go onto the card. In all locations, the rings are then recycled back into the game, saving you the headache or keeping stock on product for the machine.
As the arcade game is a machine that is designed to grab rings and the goal of the game is to grab a ring that is to be redeemed for tickets, the proposed mark merely describes a feature of the applicant’s goods and registration on the Principal Register must be refused under Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1).
Advisory: Option to Seek Registration on the Supplemental Register
Applicant may submit a disclaimer in the following format:
No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “RING” apart from the mark as shown.
TMEP §1213.08(a)(i).
For an overview of disclaimers and instructions on how to satisfy this issue using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), see the Disclaimer webpage.
Applicant should note the following additional ground for refusal.
Registration is refused because the specimen does not show the applied-for mark in use in commerce in International Class 28. 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). Specifically, the specimen is a cropped image that only shows the top portion of the goods, and therefore makes it unclear how the mark is being used in commerce.
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 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).
Examples of specimens for goods include tags, labels, instruction manuals, containers, photographs that show the mark on the actual goods or packaging, and displays associated with the actual goods at their point of sale. See TMEP §§904.03 et seq. Webpages may also be specimens for goods when they include a picture or textual description of the goods associated with the mark and the means to order the goods. TMEP §904.03(i). However, leaflets, handbills, advertising circulars, and other advertising materials generally are not acceptable specimens for 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 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, please go to http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/law/specimen.jsp.
For this application to proceed, applicant must explicitly address each refusal 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. Please see “Responding to Office Actions” and the informational video “Response to Office Action” for more information and tips on responding.
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
/Edward J. Germick/
Examing Attorney
Law Office 102
(571) 272-5862
edward.germick@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE