To: | Wu Yi (tonyhom1@outlook.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88535013 - VATTUD - N/A |
Sent: | April 21, 2020 03:15:22 PM |
Sent As: | ecom122@uspto.gov |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88535013
Mark: VATTUD
|
|
Correspondence Address: |
|
Applicant: Wu Yi
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N/A
Correspondence Email Address: |
|
FINAL OFFICE ACTION
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) and/or Electronic System for Trademark Trials and Appeals (ESTTA). A link to the appropriate TEAS response form and/or to ESTTA for an appeal appears at the end of this Office action.
Issue date: April 21, 2020
This Office action is in response to applicant’s communication filed on March 23, 2020.
In a previous Office action dated October 1, 2019, the trademark examining attorney issued a specimen refusal, an information requirement, and a domestic counsel requirement.
Based on applicant’s response, the trademark examining attorney is withdrawing the information requirement, and the domestic counsel requirement is satisfied. See TMEP §§713.02, 714.04. However, applicant’s substitute specimen again fails to show proper use of the applied-for mark in commerce with the identified goods. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth below, the specimen refusal is maintained and made FINAL. See 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b); TMEP §714.04.
SPECIMEN REFUSAL:
Thus, the refusal to register the applied-for mark is now made final because applicant failed to provide evidence of use of the mark in commerce. Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a), 2.63(b); TMEP §§904, 904.07, 1301.04(g)(i).
Goods Unsupported
Specifically, applicant’s images consisting of “ear phones” instead appear to be showing use of the applied-for mark with a case specially adapted for use with ear phones, not with the actually identified ear phones themselves. See attachment from http://www.amazon.com/dp/B081JRS3VJ?ref=myi_title_dp (displaying applicant’s webpage from which to order the goods and describing those goods as a “protective silicone cover and skin” compatible with ear phones).
Due to applicant’s identification not including covers for ear phones, applicant has thus failed to show use of the applied-for mark in commerce with any of the actually identified goods.
Response Options
Specimens for goods include a photograph of (1) the actual goods bearing the mark; (2) an actual container, packaging, tag or label for the goods bearing the mark; or (3) a point-of-sale display showing the mark directly associated with the goods. See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(1), (c); TMEP §904.03(a)-(m). A webpage specimen submitted as a display associated with the goods must show the mark in association with a picture or textual description of the goods and include information necessary for ordering the goods. TMEP §904.03(i); see 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(1), (c). Any webpage printout or screenshot submitted as a specimen must include the webpage’s URL and the date it was accessed or printed. 37 C.F.R. §2.56(c).
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) (which includes withdrawing an amendment to allege use, if one was filed), as no specimen is required before publication. This option will later necessitate additional fee(s) and filing requirements, including a specimen.
For an overview of the response options referenced above and instructions on how to satisfy these options using the online Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Specimen webpage.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, the specimen refusal is maintained and made FINAL. See 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b); TMEP §714.04.
GENERAL RESPONSE GUIDELINES
Please call or email the assigned trademark examining attorney with questions about this Office action. Although the trademark examining attorney cannot provide legal advice or statements about applicant’s rights, the trademark examining attorney can provide applicant with additional explanation about the refusal(s) and/or requirement(s) in this Office action. See TMEP §§705.02, 709.06. Although the USPTO does not accept emails as responses to Office actions, emails can be used for informal communications and will be included in the application record. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(c), 2.191; TMEP §§304.01-.02, 709.04-.05.
How to respond. Click to file a request for reconsideration of this final Office action that fully resolves all outstanding requirements and refusals and/or click to file a timely appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) with the required filing fee(s).
Sjogren, Jeffrey
/Jeffrey Sjogren/
Examining Attorney - Law Office 122
jeffrey.sjogren@uspto.gov
Phone: 571-272-5279
Fax: 571-273-5578
RESPONSE GUIDANCE