To: | Resources Connection, Inc. (ipprosecution@orrick.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88472492 - HUGO BY RGP - 700227.6031 |
Sent: | March 17, 2020 05:26:51 PM |
Sent As: | ecom120@uspto.gov |
Attachments: |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88472492
Mark: HUGO BY RGP
|
|
Correspondence Address: |
|
Applicant: Resources Connection, Inc.
|
|
Reference/Docket No. 700227.6031
Correspondence Email Address: |
|
SUSPENSION NOTICE
No Response Required
Issue date: March 17, 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). 79242449, 79253333, 79253441, 87550899, 88247407, and 88285910
Requirement resolved and maintained and continued. The following refusal to amend the identification of goods is maintained and continued. See TMEP §713.02. This requirement will be made final once this application is removed from suspension, unless a new issue arises. See TMEP §716.01.
Applicant’s proposed amendment. The proposed amendment to the identification of goods is unacceptable for the reasons set forth below.
In this case, the application originally identified the goods as various types of “downloadable software.” However, the proposed amendment identifies the following goods: “computer software that enables multiple parties to collaborate virtually over assignments and projects.” This portion of the proposed amendment is beyond the scope of the original identification because the originally identified goods were limited to software that is downloadable, and the proposed amendment encompasses goods and services that are non-downloadable.
Several areas in the proposed identification for applicant’s software are unacceptable because they fail to specify the purpose or function of the software, but instead, merely specify its content or field of use. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.03(d), 1402.11(a). Specifically, the following portions of wording in the proposed the identification for applicant’s software, repeated throughout the identification, merely specify the content or field of use rather than the purpose or function:
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.
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.
/Joshua S. Toy/
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 120
571-272-4856
joshua.toy@uspto.gov