To: | Avon Plastics, Inc. (pto@sumiplaw.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88470075 - GRID AXCENTS - 5145.36UST |
Sent: | September 05, 2019 08:46:17 AM |
Sent As: | ecom126@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 Attachment - 18 Attachment - 19 Attachment - 20 Attachment - 21 Attachment - 22 Attachment - 23 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88470075
Mark: GRID AXCENTS
|
|
Correspondence Address: 601 CARLSON PARKWAY, SUITE 1050
|
|
Applicant: Avon Plastics, Inc.
|
|
Reference/Docket No. 5145.36UST
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 05, 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).
SUMMARY OF ISSUES: The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney. Applicant must respond timely and completely to the issues below. 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.
I. DISCLAIMER REQUIRED – “GRID”
Applicant in this case must disclaim the word “GRID” because it is not inherently distinctive, and at best merely describes an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose, or use of applicant’s goods. See 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd., 695 F.3d 1247, 1251, 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1755 (Fed. Cir. 2012); TMEP §§1213, 1213.03(a).
The attached evidence from the American Heritage dictionary shows that a “grid” is “a framework of crisscrossed or parallel bars; a grating or mesh”, and that “lattice” is “an open framework made of strips of metal, word, or similar material overlapped or overlaid in a regular, usually crisscross pattern.” The attached evidence from Menards.com, HomeDepot.com, and Lowes.com shows, further, that lattices form grids, and that their openings are commonly referred to as “grid openings.” Applicant’s goods identified in International Class 19 are “non-metal lattices”. The word “GRID” in the applied-for mark therefore merely describes a characteristic of applicant’s goods.
Applicant may respond to this issue by submitting a disclaimer in the following format:
No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “GRID” apart from the mark as shown.
For an overview of disclaimers and instructions on how to satisfy this issue using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), see the Disclaimer webpage.
II. INFORMATION REQUIRED – SIGNIFICANCE OF THE MARK
(1) Explain whether any of the wording in the mark “GRID AXCENTS” has any meaning or significance in the trade or industry in which applicant’s goods are manufactured or provided, any meaning or significance as applied to applicant’s goods, or if such wording is a term of art within applicant’s industry.
(2) Respond to the following questions:
Do any of applicant’s goods form a grid, grating, and/or mesh?
Are any of the components of applicant’s goods arranged in a grid, grating, and/or mesh?
Do any of applicant’s goods comprise parts that are crisscrossed, parallel, and/or form a grid, grating, or mesh?
Will any of applicant’s goods form a grid, grating, and/or mesh?
Will any of the components of applicant’s goods be arranged in a grid, grating, and/or mesh?
Will any of applicant’s goods comprise parts that are crisscrossed, parallel, and/or form a grid, grating, or mesh?
See 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b); TMEP §814.
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.
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.
Click HERE to file a response to this non-final Office action
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.
/Carl A. Konschak/
Carl A. Konschak, Esq.
Examining Attorney
Law Office 126
(571) 270-3878
carl.konschak@uspto.gov