Offc Action Outgoing

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

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

 

 

 

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 03, 2020

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

This Office action is in response to applicant’s communication filed on December 11, 2019.

 

In a previous Office action dated November 18, 2019, the trademark examining attorney refused registration of the applied-for mark based on the following:  Specimen Requirement.  In addition, applicant was required to satisfy the following requirements:  Request for Information Requirement, Domicile Requirement, U.S. Counsel Requirement.

 

The trademark examining attorney maintains and now makes FINAL the refusal(s) and/or requirement(s) 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:

• Specimen Requirement
• Request for Information Requirement
• Domicile and U.S. Counsel Requirements

 

SPECIMEN REQUIREMENT

 

The refusal to register the applied-for mark in International Class 25 is now made FINAL because the record does not contain a specimen showing the mark in use 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(a). 

 

Applicant was previously refused registration in International Class 25 because the original specimen appeared to consist of a mock-up of the mark on the goods.  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). 

 

In response, applicant provided substitute specimens comprising two images of webpages featuring the goods and a photograph of a product in clear packaging with a tag displaying the mark.  The two substitute specimens comprising the images of webpages featuring a t-shirt and pants appear to have been created for submission with the response and do not show the applied-for mark in actual use in commerce because they appear to show the goods on an internet retail webpage that is embedded in software or in an online webpage editor such that it is not accessible to the public.  In particular, the menu at the top of both images has options labeled “Customize,” “Edit Product,” and “Purge SG Cache,” which strongly suggest that the webpages as shown are not viewable by consumers.  Moreover, the checkout webpage of applicant’s website indicates that the webpage is currently in “test mode” of a service called “Stripe,” such that actual credit card numbers cannot be entered.  See http://cocoolivia.com/checkout/ (“Pay with your credit card via Stripe.  TEST MODE ENABLED.  In test mode, you can use the card number 4242424242424242 with any CVC and a valid expiration date or check the Testing Stripe documentation for more card numbers.”); see also http://stripe.com/docs/testing (“Genuine card information cannot be used in test mode. Instead, use any of the following test card numbers, a valid expiration date in the future, and any random CVC number, to create a successful payment.”).  Furthermore, the applicant’s website includes multiple product reviews apparently submitted from an email account associated with the applicant, as shown by the Correspondence Information section of the application.  See http://cocoolivia.com/product/deep-blue-long-sleeve-t-shirt/; http://cocoolivia.com/product/womens-classic-office-work-pants/.  The webpage specimens therefore cannot be accepted as showing use of the mark in commerce in connection with the goods.   

 

In addition, applicant submitted in the response a photograph of unidentifiable goods in plastic packaging.  It is not clear whether the specimen description “classic office pants and long sleeve t shirt for women” describes the goods in this photograph, or whether it describes the goods featured in the webpage specimens.  Because the photograph does not show the mark associated with the identified goods, this specimen also cannot be accepted. 

 

Moreover, the sales invoices submitted in response to the Request for Information appear to have been created for submission with the response, as they contain invoice totals in a numerical format not typically used in commerce.  Actual “use in commerce” occurs when the mark is placed on the goods or their containers in the ordinary course of trade and the goods are actually sold or transported, and not merely to reserve a right in the mark.  See 15 U.S.C. §1127; TMEP §901.01.

 

A digitally altered image, mock-up, or photograph of an intended depiction of a mark on a label, tag, or piece of paper placed on top of an applicant’s or a third party’s goods or packaging merely for the purposes of filing a trademark application is generally not acceptable to show applicant’s use of the applied-for mark in commerce.  See 15 U.S.C. §1127; TMEP §§904.03(a), 904.04(a), 904.07(a); cf. In re Chica, Inc., 84 USPQ2d 1845, 1848 (TTAB 2007); In re The Signal Cos., 228 USPQ 956, 957-58 n.4 (TTAB 1986).  Applicant must show the mark used on applicant’s goods or packaging as it is seen by the purchasing public, with goods that are sold or transported in commerce that is regulated by the U.S. Congress.  See 15 U.S.C. §1127; TMEP §901.01. 

 

Applicant may respond to this final 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 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.

 

(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 the filing of an acceptable specimen when actual use of the mark in the sale or transport of goods occurs.

 

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 the Specimen webpage.

 

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION REQUIREMENT

 

In applicant’s response, applicant answered the request for information questions based on the substitute specimens submitted on December 11, 2019.  However, as the request for information requirement issued on November 18, 2019 explains, the applicant must answer for each specimen previously provided; that is, applicant must respond to the questions as to the originally submitted specimens.  Therefore, this requirement is maintained and made FINAL.

Additional information/documentation required.  To permit proper examination of the application record for compliance with use in commerce requirements, applicant must respond to the following requests for information and documentation about the specimen(s).  See 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b); TMEP §814.  Answer for each specimen/photograph/image previously provided.  For any website source submitted as supporting evidence, 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. 

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.

DOMICILE AND U.S. COUNSEL REQUIREMENTS

 

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 as an individual of China 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 the place applicant resides and intends to be applicant’s principal home.  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.

 

In applicant’s response, applicant submitted insurance and utilities documents bearing a street address in Chapel Hill, NC.  However, the applicant’s response did not amend applicant’s address, which remains in the application as a post office box.  Therefore, the Domicile Requirement and U.S. Counsel Requirement are maintained and made FINAL.  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); 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b).

 

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 documentation showing the name and listed domicile address of the individual, for example one of the following:

           

             (1) a current, valid signed rental, lease, or mortgage agreement; or (2) a current valid homeowner’s, renter’s, or motor vehicle insurance policy; or (3) a computer-generated bill issued by a utility company dated within 60 days of the application filing date.

           

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. 

 

Please note that the requirement for documentation to support a U.S. street address will be satisfied if applicant amends applicant’s street address to the address in the already provided documentation.

 

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).

 

 

/Christopher J Nodes/

Christopher J Nodes

Examining Attorney

Law Office 116

(571) 272-5220

christopher.nodes@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.

 

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on January 03, 2020 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88582242

 

Your trademark application has been reviewed by a trademark examining attorney.  As part of that review, the assigned attorney has issued an official letter that you must respond to by the specified deadline or your application will be abandoned.  Please follow the steps below.

 

(1)  Read the official letter.

 

(2)  Direct questions about the contents of the Office action to the assigned attorney below. 

 

 

/Christopher J Nodes/

Christopher J Nodes

Examining Attorney

Law Office 116

(571) 272-5220

christopher.nodes@uspto.gov

 

Direct questions about navigating USPTO electronic forms, the USPTO website, the application process, the status of your application, and/or whether there are outstanding deadlines or documents related to your file to the Trademark Assistance Center (TAC).

 

(3)  Respond within 6 months (or earlier, if required in the Office action) from January 03, 2020, using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS).  The response must be received by the USPTO before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  See the Office action for more information about how to respond

 

 

 

GENERAL GUIDANCE

·         Check the status of your application periodically in the Trademark Status & Document Retrieval (TSDR) database to avoid missing critical deadlines.

 

·         Update your correspondence email address, if needed, to ensure you receive important USPTO notices about your application.

 

·         Beware of misleading notices sent by private companies about your application.  Private companies not associated with the USPTO use public information available in trademark registrations to mail and email trademark-related offers and notices – most of which require fees.  All official USPTO correspondence will only be emailed from the domain “@uspto.gov.”