NOTE TO THE FILE
Sent to TICRS as Serial Number: 88580437SERIAL NUMBER: 88580439
DATE: 11/21/2019
NAME: jgriffin
NOTE:
Searched:
Lexis/Nexis
OneLook
Wikipedia
Acronym Finder Protest evidence reviewed
Other:Checked:
Geographic significance
Surname
Translation
ID with ID/CLASS mailboxChecked list of approved Canadian attorneys and agents
Discussed file with
Attorney/Applicant via:
phone Left message with
X email Attorney/ApplicantRequested Law Library search X Issued Examiner’s Amendment
for: and entered changes in TRADEUPSPRINT DO NOT PRINT Added design code in TRADEUPS
Description of the mark
Translation statement Re-imaged standard character
drawing
Negative translation statement
Consent of living individual Contacted TM MADRID ID/CLASS
about misclassified definite ID
Changed TRADEUPS to:X OTHER:
From: Smouse, Charles <Charles.Smouse@uhsinc.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 12:51 PM
To: Griffin, Jim <Jim.Griffin@USPTO.GOV>
Cc: Esch, Carolyn <Carolyn.Esch@uhsinc.com>
Subject: RE: BROOKE GLEN marks, ser. nos. 88580437 and 88580439
Agreed and approved, pls proceed with the deletion.
Thank you.
Charles Smouse | Associate General Counsel | charles.smouse@uhsinc.com | Office (610) 382-3385
Universal Health Services, Inc. | UHS of Delaware, Inc. | 367 South Gulph Road, King of Prussia, PA 19406 | www.uhsinc.com
From: Griffin, Jim <Jim.Griffin@USPTO.GOV>
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 11:30 AM
To: Smouse, Charles <Charles.Smouse@uhsinc.com>
Cc: Esch, Carolyn <Carolyn.Esch@uhsinc.com>
Subject: [External] BROOKE GLEN marks, ser. nos. 88580437 and 88580439
Importance: High
WARNING: This email is from an external source. DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. REPORT any suspicious emails to Report.Spam@uhsinc.com.
Hi Charles,
These two will be easy. Both claim Section 2(f) with regard to prior reg 4381142.
However, neither of these marks need the acquired distinctiveness claim since they appear to be inherently distinctive. (Also, I note that Reg. 4381142 wouldn’t be acceptable to use for a 2(f) claim for BROOKE GLEN BEHAVIORAL HOSPITAL since that registration is for AIKEN PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION, LLC. A registration used for a 2(f) claim has to be for the “same mark” as the new application.)
So for both of these, I can just delete the 2(f) claim and approve them for publication. Please let me know if that’s acceptable.
Jim Griffin
James T. Griffin
Examining Attorney, Law Office 103
United States Patent & Trademark Office
571-272-9169