To: | Ghost L.L.C. (trademarks@brandandbranch.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88506400 - GHOST - N/A |
Sent: | September 30, 2019 06:28:31 AM |
Sent As: | ecom114@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 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88506400
Mark: GHOST
|
|
Correspondence Address: SHABNAM MALEK AND AMANDA R. CONLEY 1305 FRANKLIN STREET, SUITE 220
|
|
Applicant: Ghost L.L.C.
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N/A
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 30, 2019
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.
SECTION 2(d) REFUSAL – LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION
The applicant has applied to register the mark GHOST and design for providing entertainment services in the form of videos.
The registered mark is GHOST in stylized form for, in relevant part:
Apparatus for recording, transmission or reproduction of sound or images; blank magnetic data carriers, blank recording discs; compact discs, DVDs and other digital recording media, namely, flash drives, all featuring audio and video recordings featuring music and related audio and visual information in the field of music; sound and/or video recordings featuring music and musical entertainment and performances; tapes featuring music; cassettes featuring music; compact discs featuring music; films featuring music and musical entertainment and performances; slides featuring music and musical entertainment and performances; video cassettes featuring music and musical entertainment and performances; video discs featuring music and musical entertainment and performances; DVDs featuring music and musical entertainment and performances; computer software applications for providing non-downloadable music and information in the field of music and entertainment; plastic encoded key cards in International Class 9;
…
Entertainment, namely, providing live music entertainment services, and provision of information relating to live performances, road shows, live stage events, theatrical performances, live music concerts and audience participation in such events; sporting and cultural activities, namely, providing live music concerts and live musical entertainment experiences; Entertainment, namely, providing non-downloadable playback of music and music-related videos via global communications networks; Entertainment, namely, providing non-downloadable prerecorded music and music-related videos, information in the field of music, and commentary and articles about music, all on-line via a global communications networks; information relating to musical events provided on-line from a computer database or the Internet; organisation of musical events and live music concert experiences; arranging and conducting seminars, conferences, exhibitions and symposia relating to music; production of radio and television programmes, production of videotapes; provision of online electronic publications, namely, magazines and newsletters on the subject of music and entertainment; publication of electronic books and journals; provision of publications, namely, books, magazines on the subject of music and entertainment on the Internet; archive library services; preparation of documentary programs on the subject of music and entertainment for broadcasting; preparation of entertainment programs on the subject of music for broadcasting; live concerts; entertainment and cultural activities, namely, live music performances; gambling; operating lotteries; ongoing television programs featuring prize draws; organising and conducting lotteries; casino services; providing casino facilities; leasing of casino games; providing casino facilities; casino and gambling services; providing amusement arcade services in International Class 41.
Trademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration of an applied-for mark that is so similar to a registered mark that it is likely consumers would be confused, mistaken, or deceived as to the commercial source of the goods and/or services of the parties. See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d). Likelihood of confusion is determined on a case-by-case basis by applying the factors set forth in In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 1361, 177 USPQ 563, 567 (C.C.P.A. 1973) (called the “du Pont factors”). In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1322, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1747 (Fed. Cir. 2017). Only those factors that are “relevant and of record” need be considered. M2 Software, Inc. v. M2 Commc’ns, Inc., 450 F.3d 1378, 1382, 78 USPQ2d 1944, 1947 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (citing Shen Mfg. Co. v. Ritz Hotel Ltd., 393 F.3d 1238, 1241, 73 USPQ2d 1350, 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2004)); see In re Inn at St. John’s, LLC, 126 USPQ2d 1742, 1744 (TTAB 2018).
Although not all du Pont factors may be relevant, there are generally two key considerations in any likelihood of confusion analysis: (1) the similarities between the compared marks and (2) the relatedness of the compared goods and/or services. See In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d at 1322, 123 USPQ2d at 1747 (quoting Herbko Int’l, Inc. v. Kappa Books, Inc., 308 F.3d 1156, 1164-65, 64 USPQ2d 1375, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2002)); Federated Foods, Inc. v. Fort Howard Paper Co.,544 F.2d 1098, 1103, 192 USPQ 24, 29 (C.C.P.A. 1976) (“The fundamental inquiry mandated by [Section] 2(d) goes to the cumulative effect of differences in the essential characteristics of the goods [or services] and differences in the marks.”); TMEP §1207.01.
Similarity of the Marks
In the present case, applicant’s proposed mark GHOST and design is similar to the registered mark GHOST in stylized form. When comparing marks, “[t]he proper test is not a side-by-side comparison of the marks, but instead whether the marks are sufficiently similar in terms of their commercial impression such that [consumers] who encounter the marks would be likely to assume a connection between the parties.” Cai v. Diamond Hong, Inc., __ F.3d __, 127 USPQ2d 1797, 1801 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (quoting Coach Servs., Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356, 1368, 101 USPQ2d 1713, 1721 (Fed. Cir. 2012)); TMEP §1207.01(b). The proper focus is on the recollection of the average purchaser, who retains a general rather than specific impression of trademarks. In re Inn at St. John’s, LLC, 126 USPQ2d 1742, 1746 (TTAB 2018) (citing In re St. Helena Hosp., 774 F.3d 747, 750-51, 113 USPQ2d 1082, 1085 (Fed. Cir. 2014); Geigy Chem. Corp. v. Atlas Chem. Indus., Inc., 438 F.2d 1005, 1007, 169 USPQ 39, 40 (CCPA 1971)); TMEP §1207.01(b).
In this instance, the respective marks create the same general overall commercial impression because the marks share the same sound, appearance, and connotation created by the shared phonetically identical term GHOST. The word GHOST is the dominant portion of the proposed mark. When evaluating a composite mark consisting of words and a design, the word portion is normally accorded greater weight because it is likely to make a greater impression upon purchasers, be remembered by them, and be used by them to refer to or request the goods and/or services. In re Aquitaine Wine USA, LLC, 126 USPQ2d 1181, 1184 (TTAB 2018) (citing In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012)); TMEP §1207.01(c)(ii). Thus, although marks must be compared in their entireties, the word portion is often considered the dominant feature and is accorded greater weight in determining whether marks are confusingly similar, even where the word portion has been disclaimed. In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d at 1366-67, 101 USPQ2d at 1911 (citing Giant Food, Inc. v. Nation’s Foodservice, Inc., 710 F.2d 1565, 1570-71, 218 USPQ2d 390, 395 (Fed. Cir. 1983)).
The different stylizations in the term GHOST in the proposed and cited marks does not obviate the refusal. The marks are essentially phonetic equivalents and thus sound similar. Similarity in sound alone may be sufficient to support a finding that the marks are confusingly similar. In re White Swan Ltd., 8 USPQ2d 1534, 1535 (TTAB 1988); see In re 1st USA Realty Prof’ls, Inc., 84 USPQ2d 1581, 1586 (TTAB 2007); TMEP §1207.01(b)(iv).
Furthermore, the likelihood of confusion is increased in this case because the goods and/or services are closely related. 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).
Thus, upon encountering applicant’s proposed mark GHOST and design for providing entertainment services in the form of videos and registrant’s mark GHOST in stylized form for the goods and/or services listed above, consumers are likely to be confused and mistakenly believe that the respective closely related goods and/or services emanate from a common source.
Relatedness of the Goods and/or Services
The applicant’s providing entertainment services in the form of videos is closely related to the registrant’s:
Apparatus for recording, transmission or reproduction of sound or images; blank magnetic data carriers, blank recording discs; compact discs, DVDs and other digital recording media, namely, flash drives, all featuring audio and video recordings featuring music and related audio and visual information in the field of music; sound and/or video recordings featuring music and musical entertainment and performances; tapes featuring music; cassettes featuring music; compact discs featuring music; films featuring music and musical entertainment and performances; slides featuring music and musical entertainment and performances; video cassettes featuring music and musical entertainment and performances; video discs featuring music and musical entertainment and performances; DVDs featuring music and musical entertainment and performances; computer software applications for providing non-downloadable music and information in the field of music and entertainment; plastic encoded key cards in International Class 9;
…
Entertainment, namely, providing live music entertainment services, and provision of information relating to live performances, road shows, live stage events, theatrical performances, live music concerts and audience participation in such events; sporting and cultural activities, namely, providing live music concerts and live musical entertainment experiences; Entertainment, namely, providing non-downloadable playback of music and music-related videos via global communications networks; Entertainment, namely, providing non-downloadable prerecorded music and music-related videos, information in the field of music, and commentary and articles about music, all on-line via a global communications networks; information relating to musical events provided on-line from a computer database or the Internet; organisation of musical events and live music concert experiences; arranging and conducting seminars, conferences, exhibitions and symposia relating to music; production of radio and television programmes, production of videotapes; provision of online electronic publications, namely, magazines and newsletters on the subject of music and entertainment; publication of electronic books and journals; provision of publications, namely, books, magazines on the subject of music and entertainment on the Internet; archive library services; preparation of documentary programs on the subject of music and entertainment for broadcasting; preparation of entertainment programs on the subject of music for broadcasting; live concerts; entertainment and cultural activities, namely, live music performances; gambling; operating lotteries; ongoing television programs featuring prize draws; organising and conducting lotteries; casino services; providing casino facilities; leasing of casino games; providing casino facilities; casino and gambling services; providing amusement arcade services in International Class 41.
because the respective goods and/or services are marketed to the same type of customers in the same channels of trade. The identifications alone are proof of this fact because the identification all include video goods and/or services.
In this case, the application uses broad wording to describe entertainment services in the form of videos, which presumably encompasses all goods and/or services of the type described, including registrant’s more narrow video goods and/or services listed above. See, e.g., In re Solid State Design Inc., 125 USPQ2d 1409, 1412-15 (TTAB 2018); Sw. Mgmt., Inc. v. Ocinomled, Ltd., 115 USPQ2d 1007, 1025 (TTAB 2015). Thus, applicant’s and registrant’s goods and/or services are legally identical. See, e.g., In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 127 USPQ2d 1627, 1629 (TTAB 2018) (citing Tuxedo Monopoly, Inc. v.Gen. Mills Fun Grp., Inc., 648 F.2d 1335, 1336, 209 USPQ 986, 988 (C.C.P.A. 1981); Inter IKEA Sys. B.V. v. Akea, LLC, 110 USPQ2d 1734, 1745 (TTAB 2014); Baseball Am. Inc. v. Powerplay Sports Ltd., 71 USPQ2d 1844, 1847 n.9 (TTAB 2004)).
Additionally, the goods and/or services of the parties have no restrictions as to nature, type, channels of trade, or classes of purchasers and are “presumed to travel in the same channels of trade to the same class of purchasers.” In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Packard Press, Inc., 281 F.3d 1261, 1268, 62 USPQ2d 1001, 1005 (Fed. Cir. 2002)). Thus, applicant’s and registrant’s goods and/or services are related.
Therefore, because the marks share the phonetically identical term GHOST and the goods and/or services are closely related, there is a likelihood of confusion as to the source of applicant’s goods and/or services. Consequently, the applicant’s mark is not entitled to registration.
PRIOR PENDING APPLICATION(S)
In response to this Office action, applicant may present arguments in support of registration by addressing the issue of the potential conflict between applicant’s mark and the marks in the referenced applications. Applicant’s election not to submit arguments at this time in no way limits applicant’s right to address this issue later if a refusal under Section 2(d) issues.
IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS AND/OR SERVICES
The identification of goods and/or services is indefinite and must be clarified. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01. The applicant must identify the goods and/or services specifically to provide public notice to the average person who does not have an in-depth knowledge of the relevant field(s) and to enable the USPTO to classify the goods and/or services properly and to reach informed judgments concerning likelihood of confusion under 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).
In an identification, an applicant must use the common commercial or generic name for the goods and/or services, be specific and all-inclusive, and avoid using indefinite words or phrases. TMEP§§1402.01, 1402.03(a). If the goods have no common commercial or generic name, applicant must describe the product, its main purpose, and its intended uses. See id. If the services have no common commercial or generic name, applicant must describe or explain the nature of the services using clear and succinct language. See id. If applicable, open-ended terms (e.g., “including,” “such as”) must be deleted and replaced with a definite term, such as “namely,” “consisting of,” “particularly,” or “in particular.” See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03(a).
The applicant should describe the goods and/or services using wording that would be generally understood by the average person. See Schenley Indus., Inc. v. Battistoni, 112 USPQ 485, 486 (Comm’r Pats. 1957); Cal. Spray-Chem. Corp. v. Osmose Wood Pres. Co. of Am., 102 USPQ 321, 322 (Comm’r Pats. 1954); TMEP §1402.01. “[T]echnical, high-sounding verbiage” should be avoided. Id., 102 USPQ at 322.
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.
In this case, the applicant must clarify the nature of the services because the identification could potentially include goods in International Class 9.
Applicant may adopt the following identification if accurate [changes in bold text]:
Pre-recorded video discs, video recording and video tapes featuring {indicate subject matter} in International Class 9;
Entertainment services in the form of videos, namely, [list the common commercial or generic name of the services, e.g., providing on-line videos featuring {indicate subject matter e.g., music, mathematics instruction, etc.}, not downloadable. If there is no common commercial or generic name for the services, the applicant must describe the services and indicate their nature.] in International Class 41.
(1) List the goods and/or services by their international class number in consecutive numerical order, starting with the lowest numbered class (for example, International Class 3: perfume; International Class 18: cosmetic bags sold empty).
(2) Submit a filing fee for each international class not covered by the fee(s) already paid (view the USPTO’s current fee schedule). Specifically, the application identifies goods and/or services based on use in commerce that are classified in at least two classes; however, applicant submitted a fee(s) sufficient for only one class(es). Applicant must either (a) submit the filing fees for the classes not covered by the submitted fees or (b) restrict the application to the number of classes covered by the fees already paid.
(3) Submit verified dates of first use of the mark anywhere and in commerce for each international class. See more information about verified dates of use.
(4) Submit a specimen for each international class. The current specimen is acceptable for class 41; and applicant needs a specimen for class 9. See more information about specimens.
Examples of specimens for goods include tags, labels, instruction manuals, containers, and photographs that show the mark on the actual goods or packaging, or displays associated with the actual goods at their point of sale. 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.
Examples of specimens for services include advertising and marketing materials, brochures, photographs of business signage and billboards, and website printouts that show the mark used in the actual sale, rendering, or advertising of the services.
(5) Submit a verified statement that “The specimen was in use in commerce on or in connection with the goods and/or services listed in the application at least as early as the filing date of the application.” See more information about verification.
See 15 U.S.C. §§1051(a), 1112; 37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(6)-(7), 2.34(a)(1), 2.86(a); TMEP §§904, 1403.01, 1403.02(c).
See an overview of the requirements for a Section 1(a) multiple-class application and how to satisfy the requirements online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form.
INFORMATION ABOUT GOODS/SERVICES REQUIRED
Factual information about the goods must clearly indicate how they operate, their salient features, and their prospective customers and channels of trade. Factual information about the services must clearly indicate what the services are and how they are rendered, their salient features, and their prospective customers and channels of trade. Conclusory statements will not satisfy this requirement for information.
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.
Merely stating that information about the goods or services is available on applicant’s website is an insufficient response and will not make the relevant information of record. See In re Planalytics, Inc., 70 USPQ2d 1453, 1457-58 (TTAB 2004).
The applicant must directly answer the following question(s) and/or provide the information requested:
1. Does GHOST have any significance as applied to the goods and/or services other than trademark and/or service mark significance?
2. Does GHOST have any significance in the relevant trade or industry other than trademark and/or service mark significance?
3. Does the applicant manufacture or offer any of the goods and/or services that appear in the registrant’s identification of goods and/or services?
4. Is the applicant aware of any other company and/or person(s) that provides both the goods and/or services, in whole or in part, listed in both the applicant’s identification and the registrant’s identification(s)? If so, the applicant must provide the name of the company and/or person(s) and any available website address for the same. The applicant need not provide more than five references per each cited registration.
QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS ACTION
If the applicant has technical questions about the TEAS response to Office action form, the applicant can review the electronic filing tips available online at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/e_filing_tips.jsp and send technical questions to the TEAS Support Team at TEAS@uspto.gov via e-mail. Please include your name, telephone number, serial number and/or registration number, a description of the issue, including the name of the TEAS form you are having problems with (e.g., “Response to Office Action Form,” “Request for Extension of Time to File a Statement of Use,” etc.), and a screen shot of any error message that you are receiving. You should receive a response within two (2) hours if the e-mail message is submitted during normal business hours.
For status inquiries or copies of documents, an applicant may check the status of or view documents filed in the trademark and/or service mark application or registration twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week, using the Trademark Status and Document Retrieval (TSDR) database on the USPTO website at http://tsdr.gov.uspto.report/. To obtain this status or view these documents, enter the application serial number or registration number and click on “Status” or “Documents.” Do not attempt to check status until approximately four to five (4-5) days after submission of a filing, to allow sufficient time for all USPTO databases to be updated.
For all other non-legal matters, including petitions to revive or reinstate an application, please contact the Trademark Assistance Center (TAC). TAC may be reached by e-mail at TrademarkAssistanceCenter@uspto.gov or by telephone at (800) 786-9199. For non-technical matters, TAC is open from 8:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST), Monday through Friday, except on federal government holidays. A list of federal government holidays is available at the following website: http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/snow-dismissal-procedures/federal-holidays/.
If applicant has questions regarding the legal issues in this Office action, please call the assigned trademark examining attorney.
How to respond. Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action
/Brian Pino/
Examining Attorney
Law Office 114
571.272.9209 Telephone
Brian.Pino2@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE