| To: | PROJiTECH (prusso@projitechllc.com) |
| Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88559659 - ONSTATION - N/A |
| Sent: | January 04, 2020 08:06:04 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. 88559659
Mark: ONSTATION
|
|
|
Correspondence Address:
|
|
|
Applicant: PROJiTECH
|
|
|
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: January 04, 2020
This Office action is in response to applicant’s communication filed on December 17, 2019.
In a previous Office action dated November 6, 2019, the trademark examining attorney refused registration of the applied-for mark based on the following: failure to show the applied-for mark in use in commerce with any of the specified services.
Based on applicant’s response, the trademark examining attorney maintains and now makes FINAL the refusal in the summary of issues below. See 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b); TMEP §714.04.
SUMMARY OF ISSUES MADE FINAL that applicant must address:
Applicant was previously refused registration in International Class 035 because the specimen did not show the applied-for services. Response options for overcoming that refusal, if any, were set forth in the prior Office action. Applicant, however, responded to such refusal by submitting substitute specimens for each refused international class that does not show proper use of the applied-for mark in commerce for the reasons immediately stated below. Thus, the refusal to register the applied-for mark in International Class 035 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).
SUBSTITUTE SPECIMENS NOT VERIFIED
In response to each refused international class, applicant provided substitute specimens that are not verified. The USPTO does not accept materials submitted as specimens without proper verification. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1), 2.59(a)-(b)(1), 2.76(b)(2); In re Adair, 45 USPQ2d 1211, 1212 n.2 (TTAB 1997). Additionally, these specimens are not acceptable for the reasons discussed further below.
Examples of specimens for services include advertising and marketing materials, brochures, photographs of business signage and billboards, and webpages that show the mark used in the actual sale, rendering, or advertising of the services. See TMEP §1301.04(a), (h)(iv)(C). Specimens comprising advertising and promotional materials must show a direct association between the mark and the services. TMEP §1301.04(f)(ii).
Applicant may respond to this final specimen refusal by satisfying one of the following for each applicable international class:
(1) Submit a different and properly verified 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 and/or services identified in the application or amendment to allege use.
(2) Amend the filing basis to intent to use under Section 1(b), for which no specimen is required. This option will later necessitate additional fee(s) and filing requirements such as providing a specimen.
For an overview of all the response options referenced above and instructions on how to satisfy these options online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, please go to http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/law/specimen.jsp.
SUBSTITUTE SPECIMENS DO NOT SHOW SERVICES
Registration is refused because the specimen does not show the applied-for mark in use in commerce in International Class 035. Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a), 1301.04(g)(i). Specifically, the specimens show the applied-for mark, “ONSTATION”, in connection with a website showing a software application for providing information, maps and communication tools along with the software application for sale on the Apple Store® and Applicant’s LinkedIn® page, all of which do not show the applied-for services, “Compilation and systemization of information into computer databases”, but rather show the offering of a software application. Further, Applicant’s description of the specimen indicates this, “The attached PDF provides examples of our mark in Use of Commerce. I've included a copy of our web page, LinkedIn company page and our listing in the Apple App Store - where the app is available for public download.”
If Applicant is providing downloadable software applications, these are goods in Class 009 and if Applicant is providing non-downloadable software, this is a service in Class 042, both which would require a new application to be filed as amending to these goods or services would be outside the scope of the services in this application.
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 services 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).
Examples of specimens for services include advertising and marketing materials, brochures, photographs of business signage and billboards, and webpages that show the mark used in the actual sale, rendering, or advertising of the services. See TMEP §1301.04(a), (h)(iv)(C). Specimens comprising advertising and promotional materials must show a direct association between the mark and the services. TMEP §1301.04(f)(ii).
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 services 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), for which no specimen is required. This option will later necessitate additional fee(s) and filing requirements such as providing a specimen.
For an overview of both response options referenced above and instructions on how to satisfy either option online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, please go to http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/law/specimen.jsp.
SUGGEST HIRING TRADEMARK COUNSEL
Because of the legal technicalities and strict deadlines involved in the USPTO application process, applicant may wish to hire a private attorney specializing in trademark matters to represent applicant in this process and provide legal advice. Although the undersigned trademark examining attorney is permitted to help an applicant understand the contents of an Office action as well as the application process in general, no USPTO attorney or staff is permitted to give an applicant legal advice or statements about an applicant’s legal rights. TMEP §§705.02, 709.06.
For attorney referral information, applicant may consult the American Bar Association’s Consumers’ Guide to Legal Help; an online directory of legal professionals, such as FindLaw®; or a local telephone directory. The USPTO, however, may not assist an applicant in the selection of a private attorney. 37 C.F.R. §2.11.
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 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).
If the Applicant has any questions or requires assistance in responding to this Final Office Action, please telephone the assigned Examining Attorney.
O'Brien, Jennifer
/Jennifer O'Brien/
Examining Attorney
Law Office 120
(571)272-4579
Jennifer.O'Brien@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE