| To: | Xiamen Youjing E-commerce Co., Ltd. (xiamenyoujing@163.com) |
| Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88538752 - LAMAXZA - N/A |
| Sent: | December 10, 2019 10:29:24 AM |
| Sent As: | ecom130@uspto.gov |
| Attachments: |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
|
U.S. Application Serial No. 88538752
Mark: LAMAXZA
|
|
|
Correspondence Address: 805 LINDA VISTA AVE, APT 106C,
|
|
|
Applicant: Xiamen Youjing E-commerce Co., Ltd.
|
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N/A
Correspondence Email Address: |
|
NONFINAL 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). A link to the appropriate TEAS response form appears at the end of this Office action.
Issue date: December 10, 2019
The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney. Applicant must respond timely and completely to the issue(s) below. 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.
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).
SPECIMEN UNACCEPTABLE
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). “Use in commerce” means (1) a bona fide use of the applied-for mark in the ordinary course of trade (and not merely to reserve a right in the mark), (2) the mark is placed in any manner on the goods, packaging, tags or labels affixed to the goods, or displays that directly associate the mark with the goods and have a point-of-sale nature, and (3) the goods are actually sold or transported in commerce. See 15 U.S.C. §1127.
An image of a product or packaging that has been digitally created or otherwise altered to include the mark does not show actual use of the mark in commerce. See 15 U.S.C. §1127; TMEP §§904.04(a), 904.07(a); cf. In re Chica, Inc., 84 USPQ2d 1845, 1848 (TTAB 2007) (holding that “a mere drawing of the goods with an illustration of how the mark may be displayed” was not an acceptable specimen because it did not show actual use in commerce); In re The Signal Cos., 228 USPQ 956, 957-58 n.4 (TTAB 1986) (noting that a printer’s proof of an advertisement would not be an acceptable specimen because it does not show actual use in commerce).
In this case, the specimen appears to be a mock-up/digitally altered because the applied-for mark appears to be crudely applied to the goods in a manner that is not consistent with industry trademark usage of how marks are typically applied to such goods. Therefore, the submitted specimen cannot be accepted.
Response options. Applicant may respond to the refusal of registration due to the specimen’s failure to show actual use in commerce by amending the filing basis to allege intent to use the mark in commerce, for which no specimen is required now. See 37 C.F.R. §2.34. This option will later necessitate additional fee(s) and filing requirements such as providing a specimen.
Alternatively, applicant may also respond to the refusal by submitting 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.
For an overview of these response options and instructions on how to satisfy either option online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Specimen webpage.
If applicant submits a verified substitute specimen, applicant must also fully respond to all the requirements for information and documentation. Failure to comply with a requirement to furnish information is grounds for refusing registration. In re Harley, 119 USPQ2d 1755, 1757-58 (TTAB 2016); TMEP §814. Merely stating that evidence is available on applicant’s or a third party website or providing a hyperlink of such a website is an insufficient response and will not make the additional information or materials of record. See In re Planalytics, Inc., 70 USPQ2d 1453, 1457-58 (TTAB 2004). However, amending the application filing basis to intent-to-use under Section 1(b) will resolve the requirements for information and documentation.
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
Answer for each specimen/photograph/image provided. For any website source, provide a digital copy of the entire webpage from top to bottom, as rendered in an Internet browser, that includes the URL and access or print date. TMEP §710.01(b) (citing In re I-Coat Co., 126 USPQ2d 1730, 1733 (TTAB 2018)).
(1) Identify the particular good(s) listed in the application for which the specimen(s) was submitted to show use of the mark.
(2) Was the specimen created for submission with this application? If so, specify the date each specimen was created. If applicant obtained the image(s) of the goods shown in the specimen(s) from a third-party website, provide the URL of the website and a digital copy of relevant webpage(s) for each image.
(3) Provide information about and examples of how applicant’s goods appear in the actual sales environment.
(a) If sold in stores, provide a representative sample of the name(s) of the stores and of photographs showing the goods for sale in the named stores, such as photographs of the sales displays or goods on shelves with the mark.
(b) If sold online, provide a representative sample of the name(s) of the online retailers, the website URL(s) for each named retailer, and a digital copy of the webpages showing the goods for sale on the named website.
(c) If sold in another type of sales environment (e.g., catalogs, trade shows), identify the environment and provide photographs and/or documentation showing the goods for sale in that environment.
(4) If the information in question (3) about how the goods appear in the actual sales environment is not available to applicant, please describe how applicant’s goods are sold or transported and provide photographs and other documentation showing how applicant’s mark appears on the goods and/or its packaging when the goods are sold or transported to or within the United States.
(5) For each category of sales environment specified in response to questions (3) and (4), specify when the goods bearing the mark were first available for purchase within the United States, the date of the first sale of the goods to or within the United States, and whether the goods are still for sale to or within the United States in that environment.
(6) For the goods identified in response to question (1), specify the dollar amount of sales with or within the United States and provide at least three invoices or other supporting documentation that show payments or other consideration made, redacting personal or private information of buyers as necessary.
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 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).
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL SPECIMENS
To permit proper examination of the application record for compliance with use in commerce requirements, applicant must submit additional specimens for disparate goods. See 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b); TMEP §814. Given the wide variety and range of unrelated goods that applicant has listed in the application, applicant must submit additional specimens to allow for a complete and accurate examination of the application and assessment of the registrability of the subject mark, in accordance with 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b)(When the range of items is wide or contains unrelated articles, the examining attorney may request additional specimen(s) under 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b); TMEP §904.01(a)). Specifically, applicant must show use of the mark as it appears on the following goods as they are sold in commerce:
Applicant must submit these additional specimens that (a) are in actual use in commerce at least as early as the filing date of the application and (b) show the mark in actual use in commerce for the goods identified in the application.
For instructions on how to satisfy this requirement online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Specimen webpage.
ADVISORY: If applicant cannot provide acceptable specimens for the above identified goods, applicant should delete those goods from the application. Applicant may be required to provide additional specimens for all goods identified in the application which applicant has verified are already being sold in commerce as of the dates of use.
Applicant also is advised that providing false statements or documentation concerning statements in the application or in response to this request for documentation is deemed submitting a paper for an improper purpose in violation of 37 C.F.R. §11.18(b), and subject to the sanctions and actions provided in 37 C.F.R. §11.18(c). See 37 C.F.R. §2.11(e).
SIGNATURE – UNACCEPTABLE
- Applicant Must Identify Declaration Signatory
The signatory in the application is identified as “Xiamen Youjing E-commerce Co., Ltd.”; however, this is unacceptable because “Xiamen Youjing E-commerce Co., Ltd.” is the name of a juristic entity and does not indicate the name of the person signing the application. See 37 C.F.R. §2.193; TMEP § 611.01(b), 804.04.
A signatory must personally sign his or her name. 37 C.F.R. §§2.193(a)(1), (c)(1). Moreover, the name of the person who signs a document submitted in connection with an application must be set forth in printed or typed form immediately below or adjacent to the signature,or identified elsewhere in the filing (e.g., in a cover letter or other document that accompanies the filing). 37 C.F.R. §2.193(d). If the signatory’s name is not set forth in a document, the USPTO may require that it be stated for the record. In addition, when signing an application, a signatory should set forth his or her title or state the relationship between the applicant and the person who signed the verification. See TMEP §804.04.
Therefore, applicant must state for the record the full legal name of the individual who signed the declaration supporting the application. Applicant must also confirm the signatory’s position and/or title. See TMEP § 804.04. If applicant is unable to provide this information, or if the signatory did not have authority to bind the applicant, applicant must submit a new affidavit or signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20 which verifies the facts of the application. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.193(e)(1)–2.193(e)(1)(iii), 2.2(n), 2.33(a)-(b)(1), (c), 2.34(a)(1)(i); TMEP §804. In such instance, the following statements must be verified:
That applicant believes applicant is the owner of the mark; that the mark is in use in commerce and was in use in commerce as of the application filing date; that to the best of the signatory’s knowledge and belief, no other persons, except, if applicable, concurrent users, have the right to use the mark in commerce, either in the identical form or in such near resemblance as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods/services of such other persons, to cause confusion or mistake, or to deceive; that the specimen shows the mark as used on or in connection with the goods or services as of the application filing date; and that the facts set forth in the application are true. 37 C.F.R. §§2.33(b)(1), (c), 2.34(a)(1)(i), 2.59(a). For more information about this, see the Verified statement webpage.
To provide these verified statements. After opening the correct TEAS response form, answer “yes” to wizard question #10, and follow the instructions within the form for signing. In this case, the form will require two signatures: one in the “Declaration Signature” section and one in the “Response Signature” section.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE MARK – INQUIRY
To permit proper examination of the application, applicant must provide the following information:
(1) Explain whether the wording in the mark “LAMAXZA” has any meaning or significance in the industry in which the goods and/or services are manufactured/provided, any meaning or significance as applied to applicant’s goods and/or services, or if such wording is a term of art within applicant’s industry.
(2) Explain whether this wording identifies a geographic place or has any meaning in a foreign language.
(3) Submit an English translation of all foreign wording in a mark. If the wording does not have meaning in a foreign language, applicant should so specify.
The format for an English translation: “The English translation of “LAMAXZA” is “{specify}”.
The format for when there is no English translation or meaning of the transliteration: “The wording “LAMAXZA” has no meaning in a foreign language.
See 37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(9)-(a)(10), 2.61(b); TMEP §§809-809.03, 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.
Applicant must be represented by a U.S.-licensed attorney. An applicant whose domicile is located outside of the United States or its territories is foreign-domiciled and must be represented at the USPTO by an attorney who is an active member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of a U.S. state or territory. 37 C.F.R. §§2.11(a), 11.14; Requirement of U.S.-Licensed Attorney for Foreign-Domiciled Trademark Applicants & Registrants, Examination Guide 4-19, at I.A. (Rev. Sept. 2019) An individual applicant’s domicile is the place a person resides and intends to be the person’s principal home. 37 C.F.R. §2.2(o); Examination Guide 4-19, at I.A. A juristic entity’s domicile is the principal place of business; i.e., headquarters, where a juristic entity applicant’s senior executives or officers ordinarily direct and control the entity’s activities. 37 C.F.R. §2.2(o); Examination Guide 4-19, at I.A. Because applicant is foreign-domiciled, applicant must appoint such a U.S.-licensed attorney qualified to practice under 37 C.F.R. §11.14 as its representative before the application may proceed to registration. 37 C.F.R. §2.11(a). See Hiring a U.S.-licensed trademark attorney for more information.
To appoint a U.S.-licensed attorney. To appoint an attorney, applicant should submit a completed Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) Revocation, Appointment, and/or Change of Address of Attorney/Domestic Representative form. The newly-appointed attorney must submit a TEAS Response to Examining Attorney Office Action form indicating that an appointment of attorney has been made and address all other refusals or requirements in this action, if any. Alternatively, if applicant retains an attorney before filing the response, the attorney can respond to this Office action by using the appropriate TEAS response form and provide his or her attorney information in the form and sign it as applicant’s attorney. See 37 C.F.R. §2.17(b)(1)(ii).
Applicant’s U.S. counsel should submit the following:
Attorney bar information required. Applicant’s attorney must provide the following bar information: (1) his or her bar membership number, if the bar provides one; (2) the name of the U.S. state, commonwealth, or territory of his or her bar membership; and (3) the year of his or her admission to the bar. 37 C.F.R. §2.17(b)(3). This information is required for all U.S.-licensed attorneys who are representing trademark applicants at the USPTO. Id. If the attorney’s bar does not issue bar membership numbers, applicant must state this for the record. See id.
To provide bar information. Applicant’s attorney should respond to this Office action by using the appropriate TEAS response form and provide his or her bar information in the “Attorney Information” page of the form, within the bar information section. See 37 C.F.R. §2.17(b)(1)(ii). Bar information provided in any other area of the form will be viewable by the public in USPTO records.
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.
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.
How to respond. Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action.
/Erin Z. Dyer/
Erin Zaskoda Dyer
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 130/TM Innovation Lab
(571) 272-9740
erin.zaskoda@uspto.gov (preferred)
RESPONSE GUIDANCE