To: | Yushin Precision Equipment Co., Ltd. (docketing@rankinhill.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88612365 - YCV - NIS-46119.01 |
Sent: | December 12, 2019 02:15:46 PM |
Sent As: | ecom128@uspto.gov |
Attachments: |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88612365
Mark: YCV
|
|
Correspondence Address:
|
|
Applicant: Yushin Precision Equipment Co., Ltd.
|
|
Reference/Docket No. NIS-46119.01
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: December 12, 2019
SEARCH OF OFFICE’S DATABASE OF MARKS
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
IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS – REQUIRED
PLEASE NOTE: 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 at http://tess2.gov.uspto.report/netahtml/tidmn.html. See TMEP §1402.04.
The wording “apparatus” in the identification of goods for International Class 7 is indefinite and must be clarified to further specify the type of apparatus being manufactured. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01. See suggested amended wording below.
Applicant should note that any wording in bold, in italics, underlined and/or in ALL CAPS below offers guidance and/or shows
the changes being proposed for the identification of goods. If there is wording in the applicant’s version of the identification of goods which should be removed, it
will be shown with a line through it such as this: strikethrough. When making its amendments, applicant should
enter them in standard font, not in bold, in italics, underlined or in ALL CAPS.
Applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate:
Class 7: Take-out machines for removing plastic molded parts from plastic molding machines; Take-out machines for removing plastic molded parts from injection molding machines; Automatic take-out machines for removing plastic molded parts from plastic molding machines; Automatic take-out robots for removing plastic molded parts from plastic molding machines; Automatic take-out robots for removing plastic molded parts from injection molding machines; Automatic take-out machines for removing plastic molded parts from injection molding machines; Cutting machines for plastic molded parts; Take-out machines for removing optical discs from optical discs manufacturing machines; Injection moulding machines; Moulds being parts of machines for processing plastics; Plastic processing machines; Loading-unloading machines and apparatus, namely, _____ {indicate specific goods, e.g., rubber tracks being parts of loading-unloading machines}
See TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03.
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.
Applicant should note the following additional requirement outlined below.
SIGNIFICANCE OF LETTERING – REQUIRED
Applicant should note the following advisory outlined below.
SECTION 1(b) & 44(e) DUAL BASIS ADVISORY
Alternatively, as applicant has not yet submitted the foreign registration or otherwise perfected the Section 44(e) basis, applicant can amend the application to rely solely on the Section 1 basis and request deletion of the Section 44(e) basis.
Unless applicant indicates otherwise, the USPTO will presume that applicant is relying on both Sections 1(b) and 44(e). Thus, although the mark may be approved for publication, it will not register until an acceptable allegation of use has been filed for the goods based on Section 1(b).
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.
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. 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.
Megan Aurand
/Megan Aurand/
Examining Attorney
Law Office 128
(571) 272-1614
megan.aurand@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE