Offc Action Outgoing

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application

 

 

 

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:  August 17, 2020

 

 

The statement of use has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney.  Applicant must respond timely and completely to the issue below.  15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES:

·         Refusal:  Specimen does not show use in commerce in International Class 42

 

1. REFUSAL:  SPECIMEN DOES NOT USE IN COMMERCE IN INTERNATIONAL CLASS 42

 

Registration is refused because the specimen does not show the applied-for mark as actually used in commerce in connection with the service specified in International Class 42.  Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a); In re Keep A Breast Found., 123 USPQ2d 1869, 1876-79 (TTAB 2017); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a), 1301.04(d), (g)(i). 

 

An application based on Trademark Act Section 1(a) must include a specimen showing the applied-for mark as actually used in commerce for each international class of services identified in the statement of 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); see In re Gulf Coast Nutritionals, Inc., 106 USPQ2d 1243, 1247 (TTAB 2013).

 

In this case, the applied-for service in International Class 42 is “Software as a service (SaaS) services featuring software for measuring, tracking, and reporting software application defects, vulnerabilities, ratings, user reviews and experiences.”  Applicant submitted a specimen described in the Statement of Use as “marketing materials and white paper.”  The first page appears to be an advertisement or marketing material for a type of “rating.”  Specifically, the document is entitled “THE APPLAUSE QUALITY SCORE RATING” and the first paragraph mentions “[t]he Applause Quality Score rating, also known as AQS^TM enables you to understand the level of quality you are achieving build-over-build, so you can adjust your testing scope and strategy accordingly.”  However, that document does not describe how the service of providing the rating is administered or provided.  In other words, it does not describe if that service is administered or provided by a group of professionals, such as software engineers, supplied by applicant or if it is provided by means of a computer program, such as software as a service (SaaS).  Therefore, one cannot ascertain the “service activity” provided by applicant from that specimen.

 

The same analysis applies to the whitepaper on pages 2-7 of the specimen.  That whitepaper, entitled “INTRODUCING THE APPLAUSE QUALITY SORE RATING” goes into great detail about the APPLAUSE QUALITY SCORE (AQS) rating and how it works.  It also shows “AQS” used as a source indicator of applicant’s rating.  However, the whitepaper does not describe how the services are administered or provided.  As one cannot ascertain the service activity provided from the information provided by the specimen, the white paper submitted as a specimen also fails to show a direct association between the mark and the services.  Therefore, registration is refused because the specimen does not show the applied-for mark as actually used in commerce in connection with the service specified in International Class 42. 

 

Examples of specimens.  Specimens for services must show a direct association between the mark and the services and include:  (1) copies of advertising and marketing material, (2) a photograph of business signage or billboards, or (3) materials showing the mark in the sale, rendering, or advertising of the services.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(2), (c); TMEP §1301.04(a), (h)(iv)(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’S RESPONSE OPTIONS: 

 

Applicant may respond to this refusal by submitting, for International Class 42, a different specimen (a verified “substitute” specimen) that (a) was in actual use in commerce prior to the expiration of the deadline for filing the statement of use and (b) shows the mark in actual use in commerce for the services identified in the statement of 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 prior to expiration of the filing deadline for filing a statement of use.”  The substitute specimen cannot be accepted without this statement.

 

Applicant may not withdraw the statement of use.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.88(f); TMEP §1109.17.

 

For an overview of this response option and instructions on how to submit a different specimen using the online Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Specimen webpage.  

 

Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.

 

Response guidelines.  For this application to proceed, applicant must explicitly address each refusal in this Office action.  For a refusal, applicant may provide written arguments and evidence against the refusal, and may have other response options if specified above.  Please see “Responding to Office Actions” and the informational video “Response to Office Action” for more information and tips on responding.

 

Please call or email the assigned trademark examining attorney with questions about this Office action.  Although an examining attorney cannot provide legal advice, the examining attorney can provide additional explanation about the refusal in this Office action.  See TMEP §§705.02, 709.06. 

 

The USPTO does not accept emails as responses to Office actions; however, emails can be used for informal communications and are 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 response to this nonfinal Office action.    

 

 

Edward Germick

/Edward J. Germick/

Examing Attorney

Law Office 102

(571) 272-5862

edward.germick@uspto.gov

 

 

 

RESPONSE GUIDANCE

• Missing the response deadline to this letter will cause the application to abandon.  A response or notice of appeal must be received by the USPTO before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  TEAS and ESTTA maintenance or unforeseen circumstances could affect an applicant’s ability to timely respond.  

 

• Responses signed by an unauthorized party are not accepted and can cause the application to abandon.  If applicant does not have an attorney, the response must be signed by the individual applicant, all joint applicants, or someone with legal authority to bind a juristic applicant.  If applicant has an attorney, the response must be signed by the attorney.

 

• If needed, find contact information for the supervisor of the office or unit listed in the signature block.