To: | Lipotec, S.A. (trademarks@lubrizol.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88592886 - UNICLAY - 8201 |
Sent: | November 26, 2019 04:35:05 PM |
Sent As: | ecom102@uspto.gov |
Attachments: |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88592886
Mark: UNICLAY
|
|
Correspondence Address:
|
|
Applicant: Lipotec, S.A.
|
|
Reference/Docket No. 8201
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: November 26, 2019
The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney. Applicant must respond timely and completely to the issue(s) below. 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.
SUMMARY OF ISSUES
1) Identification of Goods – International Class 3.
2) Significance of Wording Requirement.
NO CONFLICTING MARKS NOTED
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).
IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS
The identification of goods is unacceptable as indefinite because as worded, the exact nature of the goods is unclear. Accordingly, the applicant must specify the exact nature of its goods
Applicant must rewrite the identification of goods in its entirety because of the nature and extent of the amendment. 37 C.F.R. §2.74(b). The suggestions are in bold.
The applicant may adopt any or all of the following identifications, if accurate:
“Chemicals sold as components of cosmetics; Cosmetic preparations for skin care; cosmetic preparations for slimming purposes; cosmetic creams; lotions for cosmetic purposes; cosmetic preparations for baths; oils for cosmetic purposes; Non-medicated soaps, skin soaps, bath soaps, hair lotions; Non-medicated hand soaps, essential oils, namely, [Specify exact nature of goods by its common commercial name, i.e., essential oils for personal use, essential oils for household use, essential oils for use in aromatherapy]; cosmetics, namely, [Specify exact nature of the goods by its common commercial name, i.e., cosmetic body scrubs for the face, hands and feet, cosmetic oils, cosmetic preparations, cosmetic creams],” in International Class 3.
TMEP Section 1402.01.
An applicant may amend an identification of goods only to clarify or limit the goods; adding to or broadening the scope of the goods is not permitted. 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); see TMEP §§1402.06 et seq., 1402.07 et seq.
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.
GENERAL INQUIRY ON SIGNIFICANCE
Applicant must explain whether “UNICLAY” has any meaning or significance in the industry in which the goods and/or services are manufactured/provided, or if such wording is a “term of art” within applicant’s industry. Applicant must also explain whether this wording identifies a geographic place. See 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b); TMEP §814.
Failure to respond to a request for information is an additional ground for refusing registration. See In re Cheezwhse.com, Inc., 85 USPQ2d 1917, 1919 (TTAB 2008); In re DTI P’ship LLP, 67 USPQ2d 1699, 1701 (TTAB 2003); TMEP §814.
RESPONSE GUIDELINES AND ABANDONMENT ADVISORY – FULL REFUSAL
For this application to proceed further, 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.
In addition, because applicant filed a TEAS RF application, applicant must respond online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) to avoid incurring an additional fee. See 37 C.F.R. §2.23(b)(1), (c).
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.
/Howard Smiga/
Examining Attorney
Law Office 102
571-272-9220
Howard.Smiga@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE