| To: | Carl Cooper (spiritheritage@gmail.com) |
| Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88580399 - HEBREW UNION - N/A |
| Sent: | January 07, 2020 12:35:21 PM |
| Sent As: | ecom117@uspto.gov |
| Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 Attachment - 5 Attachment - 6 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
|
U.S. Application Serial No. 88580399
Mark: HEBREW UNION
|
|
|
Correspondence Address: |
|
|
Applicant: Carl Cooper
|
|
|
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: January 07, 2020
This Office action is supplemental to and supersedes the previous Office action issued on November 21, 2019 in connection with this application. The assigned trademark examining attorney inadvertently omitted refusals and/or requirements relevant to the mark in the subject application. See TMEP §§706, 711.02. Specifically, the specimen refusal was incomplete and the disclaimer requirement was incomplete, as further explained below.
The trademark examining attorney apologizes for any inconvenience caused by the delay in raising this issue(s).
Applicant must address all issue(s) raised in this Office action, in addition to the issues raised in the Office action dated November 21, 2019, which are duplicated below for applicant’s convenience.
OFFICE SEARCH RESULTS
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).
SUMMARY OF ISSUES
Applicant must respond to all issues raised in this Office action and the previous November 21, 2019 Office action, within six (6) months of the date of issuance of this Office action. 37 C.F.R. §2.62(a); see TMEP §711.02. If applicant does not respond within this time limit, the application will be abandoned. 37 C.F.R. §2.65(a).
SPECIMEN UNACCEPTABLE – SPECIMEN MUST SHOW MARK IN USE IN COMMERCE IN CONNECTION WITH THE APPLIED-FOR SERVICES
Registration is refused because the specimen does not show use in commerce of the applied-for mark with the identified services. 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(f)(ii), (g)(i). Specifically, the specimen fails to show the mark used in a way that would create in the minds of potential consumers a sufficient nexus or direct association between the mark and the services being offered. In re Universal Oil Prods. Co., 476 F.2d 653, 655, 177 USPQ 456, 457 (C.C.P.A. 1973); TMEP §1301.04(f)(ii); see also In re JobDiva, Inc., 843 F.3d 936, 942, 121 USPQ2d 1122, 1126 (Fed. Cir. 2016); In re Adver. & Mktg. Dev., Inc., 821 F.2d 614, 620, 2 USPQ2d 2010, 2014 (Fed. Cir. 1987).
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). A service mark is used in commerce “when it is used or displayed in the sale or advertising of services.” See 15 U.S.C. § 1127; 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(2).
When determining whether a mark is used in connection with the services in the application, a key consideration is the perception of the user. In re JobDiva, Inc., 843 F.3d at 942, 121 USPQ2d at 1126 (citing Lens.com, Inc. v. 1-800 Contacts, Inc., 686 F.3d 1376, 1381-82, 103 USPQ2d 1672, 1676 (Fed Cir. 2012)). A specimen must show the mark used in a way that would create in the minds of potential consumers a sufficient nexus or direct association between the mark and the services being offered. In re Universal Oil Prods. Co., 476 F.2d at 655, 177 USPQ2d at 457; TMEP §1301.04(f)(ii); see also In re JobDiva, Inc., 843 F.3d at 942, 121 USPQ2d at 1126; In re Adver. & Mktg. Dev., Inc., 821 F.2d at 620, 2 USPQ2d at 2014.
To show a direct association, specimens consisting of advertising or promotional materials must (1) explicitly reference the services and (2) show the mark used to identify the services and their source. In re WAY Media, Inc., 118 USPQ2d at 1698 (quoting In re Osmotica Holdings, Corp., 95 USPQ2d 1666, 1668 (TTAB 2010)); TMEP §1301.04(f)(ii). Although the exact nature of the services does not need to be specified in the specimen, there must be something which creates in the mind of the purchaser an association between the mark and the services. In re Adair, 45 USPQ2d 1211, 1215 (TTAB 1997) (quoting In re Johnson Controls Inc., 33 USPQ2d 1318, 1320 (TTAB 1994)).
Here, the applied-for services are “Promoting Hebrew growth, economic development, justice, and education by citizen inclusion and increased cooperation and integration of Hebrew people in their land.” The specimen identifies the mark as an “emblem” and goes on to describe the symbolism behind the design and the colors used; however, because the specimen does not show a direct association between the mark and services, the specimen is unacceptable.
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 the response options above and instructions on how to satisfy them using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) response form, see the Specimen webpage.
Applicant should note the following additional specimen refusal.
SPECIMEN UNACCEPTABLE – MARK IN SPECIMEN MUST MATCH MARK IN DRAWING
Registration is refused because the specimen does not show the mark in the drawing in use in commerce, which is required in the application or amendment to allege use. 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). The mark appearing on the specimen and in the drawing must match; that is, the mark in the drawing “must be a substantially exact representation of the mark” on the specimen. See 37 C.F.R. §2.51(a)-(b); TMEP §807.12(a).
In this case, the drawing displays the mark as a map of the world within concentric circles immediately to the left of the black wording “HEBREW” above the black wording “UNION”; however, the specimen displays the mark as a map of the world within concentric circles far removed from the wording “HEBREW UNION” on one line in brown. The mark on the specimen thus does not match the mark in the drawing. Applicant has thus failed to provide the required evidence of use of the mark in commerce. See TMEP §807.12(a).
Applicant may respond to this refusal by satisfying one of the following:
(1) Submit a different specimen (a verified “substitute” specimen) for each applicable international class that (a) shows the mark in the drawing in actual use in commerce for the goods and/or services in the application or amendment to allege use, and (b) 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.
Examples of specimens for goods include tags, labels, instruction manuals, containers, photographs that show the mark on the actual goods or packaging, and displays associated with the actual goods at their point of sale. See TMEP §§904.03 et seq. 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. TMEP §904.03(i). 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).
(2) Submit a request to 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.
The USPTO will not accept an amended drawing submitted in response to this refusal because the changes would materially alter the drawing of the mark in the original application – in particular, the placement of the wording – and, because the specimen is unacceptable in any case, as explained in the above section entitled “Specimen unacceptable – specimen must show mark in use in commerce in connection with the applied-for services.” See 37 C.F.R. §2.72(a)-(b); TMEP §807.14.
For more information about drawings and instructions on how to satisfy these response options online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Drawing webpage.
Applicant should note the following requirement(s)
ENTITY CLARIFICATION REQUIRED
The name of an individual person appears in the section of the application intended for the trademark owner’s name; however, the legal entity is set forth as a “cooperative corporation.” Applicant must clarify this inconsistency. TMEP §803.02(a); see 37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(2), (a)(3)(i)-(ii), 2.61(b).
If applicant is an individual, applicant must request that the legal entity be amended to “individual” and must indicate his or her country of citizenship. See TMEP §803.03(a). Alternatively, if applicant is a corporation, applicant must provide the legal name of the corporation and U.S. state or foreign country of incorporation or organization. See TMEP §803.03(c).
If, in response to the above request, applicant provides information indicating that it is not the owner of the mark, registration will be refused because the application was void as filed. See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(d); TMEP §§803.06, 1201.02(b). An application must be filed by the party who owns or is entitled to use the mark as of the application filing date. See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(d); TMEP §1201.02(b).
IDENTIFICATION OF SERVICES MUST BE CLARIFIED
The identification of services must be clarified because it is too broad and could include services in other international classes. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03. In particular, this wording could encompass “Promoting public awareness of the interests of Hebrew people in the field of their growth, economic development, justice, and education by citizen inclusion and increased cooperation and integration of Hebrew people in their land” in International Class 35 as well as “Providing information in the field of social justice for Hebrew people in their land” in International Class 45.
Applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate:
International Class 35: Promoting public awareness of the interests of Hebrew people in the field of their growth, economic development, justice, and education by citizen inclusion and increased cooperation and integration of Hebrew people in their land
International Class 45: Providing information in the field of social justice for Hebrew people in their land
Applicant’s goods and/or services may be clarified or limited, but may not be expanded beyond those originally itemized in the application or as acceptably amended. See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06. Applicant may clarify or limit the identification by inserting qualifying language or deleting items to result in a more specific identification; however, applicant may not substitute different goods and/or services or add goods and/or services not found or encompassed by those in the original application or as acceptably amended. See TMEP §1402.06(a)-(b). The scope of the goods and/or services sets the outer limit for any changes to the identification and is generally determined by the ordinary meaning of the wording in the identification. TMEP §§1402.06(b), 1402.07(a)-(b). Any acceptable changes to the goods and/or services will further limit scope, and once goods and/or services are deleted, they are not permitted to be reinserted. TMEP §1402.07(e).
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.
MULTIPLE CLASS REQUIREMENTS
The application references goods and/or services based on use in commerce in more than one international class; therefore, applicant must satisfy all the requirements below for each international class:
(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 not acceptable for any international class. See more information about specimens.
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.
DOMICILE REQUIRED
Applicant must provide applicant’s domicile address. All applications must include the applicant’s domicile address, and domicile dictates whether an applicant is required to have an attorney who is an active member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of a U.S. state or territory represent the applicant at the USPTO. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.2(o)-(p), 2.11(a), 2.189; Requirement of U.S.-Licensed Attorney for Foreign-Domiciled Trademark Applicants and 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. 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 a U.S.-licensed attorney qualified to practice before the USPTO under 37 C.F.R. §11.14. 37 C.F.R. §2.11(a).
The application record lists applicant a juristic entity of the United States and specifies applicant’s domicile as a post office box instead of a street address. In most cases, a post office box is not acceptable as a domicile address because it does not identify the location of applicant’s headquarters where the entity’s senior executives or officers ordinarily direct and control the entity’s activities. See37 C.F.R. §§2.2(o)-(p), 2.189; Examination Guide 4-19, at I.A.3. Thus, applicant must provide its domicile street address. See 37 C.F.R. §2.189. Alternatively, an applicant may demonstrate that the listed address is, in fact, the applicant’s domicile. Examination Guide 4-19, at I.A.3.
Applicant must either provide documentation to support a U.S. street address or appoint a U.S. licensed attorney. If applicant amends the application to list a domicile street address outside of the United States or its territories, or if applicant lists a U.S. street address as its domicile and elects not to provide documentation to support its U.S. street address as explained below, applicant must appoint a U.S. licensed attorney qualified to practice before the USPTO under 37 C.F.R. §11.14 as its representative before the application may proceed to registration. See Hiring a U.S.-licensed trademark attorney for more information. If applicant can establish domicile in the United States, the requirement to appoint a U.S.-licensed attorney will be withdrawn. If applicant appoints a U.S.-licensed attorney, the requirement for documentation will be withdrawn.
If applicant provides a U.S. street address as the applicant’s domicile address and elects not to appoint a U.S.-licensed attorney as its representative, then applicant must provide the following documentation to support its U.S. street address. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.11(b), 2.61(b), 2.189; Examination Guide 4-19, at I.A.1-3. Specifically, applicant must provide the most recent documentation showing that the address is the applicant’s or registrant’s business headquarters, for example one of the following:
(1) the most recent final annual or quarterly report or other similar report; or (2) a current certificate of good standing for the corporation or other business entity issued by a federal or state government agency.
Examination Guide 4-19, at I.A.2; see 37 C.F.R. §§2.11(b), 2.61(b), 2.189.
Submitted documentation must show the name, listed address, and the date of the document but should redact other personal and financial 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 then 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).
To provide documentation supporting applicant’s domicile. Open the correct TEAS response form and enter the serial number, answer “yes” to wizard question #3, and on the “Additional Statement(s)” page, below the “Miscellaneous Statement” field, click the button below the text box to attach documentation to support the U.S. street address.
MARK DESCRIPTION MUST BE AMENDED
Applicant must submit an amended description of the mark because the current one contains extraneous information. 37 C.F.R. §2.37; see TMEP §§808.01, 808.02. Descriptions must be accurate and identify all the literal and design elements in the mark. See 37 C.F.R. §2.37; TMEP §§808 et seq.
The following description is suggested, if accurate: The mark consists of a world map in brown and partially outlined in yellow within a brown circle, within a red circle, within a black circle; all of the foregoing is to the left of the wording HEBREW UNION in black. The color white represents background only and is not claimed as a feature of the mark.
DISCLAIMER REQUIRED
Applicant must provide a disclaimer of the unregistrable part(s) of the applied-for mark even though the mark as a whole appears to be registrable. See 15 U.S.C. §1056(a); TMEP §§1213, 1213.03(a). A disclaimer of an unregistrable part of a mark will not affect the mark’s appearance. See Schwarzkopf v. John H. Breck, Inc., 340 F.2d 978, 979-80, 144 USPQ 433, 433 (C.C.P.A. 1965).
In this case, applicant must disclaim the design of the map of the world because it is not inherently distinctive. This unregistrable design at best is primarily geographically descriptive of the origin of applicant’s goods and/or services. See 15 U.S.C. §§1052(e)(2); In re Societe Generale des Eaux Minerales de Vittel S.A., 824 F.2d 957, 959, 3 USPQ2d 1450, 1451-52 (Fed. Cir. 1987); In re Joint-Stock Co. “Baik”, 80 USPQ2d 1305, 1309 (TTAB 2006); TMEP §§1210.01(a), 1213, 1213.03(a), (c).
An accurate design of geographically descriptive matter and the word or words which describe the design are legal equivalents; therefore, a design must be disclaimed the same as the primarily geographically descriptive wording See In re Can. Dry Ginger Ale, Inc., 86 F.2d 830, 832, 32 USPQ 49, 50 (C.C.P.A. 1936); TMEP §1210.02(a).
The design of the map of the world is the legal equivalent of the geographic place known as the world. TMEP §1210.02(a). The attached dictionary evidence shows that the world is a generally known geographic place or location. See TMEP §§1210.02 et seq. Because applicant’s services are not limited in any way, they are presumed to have an international reach; accordingly, the map of the world is geographically descriptive of applicant’s services. See TMEP §1210.03. Because the services originate in this place or location, a public association of the services with the place is presumed. See In re Hollywood Lawyers Online, 110 USPQ2d 1852, 1858 (TTAB 2014) (citing In re Spirits of New Merced, LLC, 85 USPQ2d 1614, 1621 (TTAB 2007)); TMEP §§1210.02(a) 1210.04.
Additionally, applicant must disclaim the wording “HEBREW” in the mark because this wording is not inherently distinctive. This unregistrable term is at best merely descriptive of a feature of applicant’s services. See 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1). The attached dictionary definition shows that “Hebrew” refers to a member of a group that descends from particular biblical figures. Further, applicant’s own identification of services indicates that applicant “promot[es] Hebrew growth” and “integration of Hebrew people in their land.” Accordingly, the word “HEBREW” in the mark must also be disclaimed as merely descriptive.
If applicant does not provide the required disclaimer, the USPTO may refuse to register the entire mark. See In re Stereotaxis Inc., 429 F.3d 1039, 1041, 77 USPQ2d 1087, 1089 (Fed. Cir. 2005); TMEP §1213.01(b).
Applicant may respond to this issue by submitting a disclaimer in the following format:
No claim is made to the exclusive right to use the map of the world and the word “HEBREW” apart from the mark as shown.
For an overview of disclaimers and instructions on how to satisfy this issue using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), see the Disclaimer webpage.
RESPONSE
Response guidelines. For this application to proceed, applicant must explicitly address each refusal and/or requirement 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. For a requirement, applicant should set forth the changes or statements. Please see “Responding to Office Actions” and the informational video “Response to Office Action” for more information and tips on responding.
Applicant should include the following information on all correspondence with the Office: (1) the name and law office number of the trademark examining attorney, (2) the serial number and filing date of the application, (3) the date of issuance of this Office action, (4) applicant’s name, address, telephone number and e-mail address (if applicable), and (5) the mark. 37 C.F.R. §2.194(b)(1); TMEP §302.03(a).
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.
/Miah Rosenberg LaMont/
Examining Attorney
Law Office 117
(571) 272-6170
miah.lamont@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE
