Offc Action Outgoing

PATHFINDER

Pamela Conrad

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88614437 - PATHFINDER - N/A

To: Pamela Conrad (tmls@coblentzlaw.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88614437 - PATHFINDER - N/A
Sent: May 12, 2021 08:26:24 AM
Sent As: ecom117@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

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

 

U.S. Application Serial No. 88614437

 

Mark:  PATHFINDER

 

 

 

 

Correspondence Address: 

Lawrence J. Siskind

COBLENTZ PATCH DUFFY BASS LLP

ONE MONTGOMERY STREET, SUITE 3000

SAN FRANCISCO CA 94104

 

 

 

Applicant:  Pamela Conrad

 

 

 

Reference/Docket No. N/A

 

Correspondence Email Address: 

 tmls@coblentzlaw.com

 

 

 

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:  May 12, 2021

 

INTRODUCTION

 

This Office action is in response to applicant’s communications filed on April 19, 2021.

 

In the previous Office action dated April 5, 2021, registration of the applied-for mark was refused because applicant’s specimen was unacceptable.  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).

 

Based on applicant’s response, the specimen requirement is made FINAL.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b); TMEP §714.04.

 

ISSUE MADE FINAL that applicant must address:

 

  • Final Requirement – Unacceptable Specimen

 

FINAL REQUIREMENT – UNACCEPTABLE SPECIMEN

 

 

Specimen does not show direct association between mark and services.  Registration is refused because the specimen does not show a direct association between the mark and the services and fails to show the applied-for mark as actually used in commerce with the identified services in International Class 42.  Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a), (b)(2); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a), 1301.04(f)(ii), (g)(i).  An application based on Trademark Act Section 1(a) must include a specimen showing the applied-for mark as actually used in commerce for each international class of services identified in the statement of 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). 

 

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 936, 942, 121 USPQ2d 1122, 1126 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (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.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(2); In re Universal Oil Prods. Co., 476 F.2d 653, 655, 177 USPQ2d 456, 457 (C.C.P.A. 1973); TMEP §1301.04(f)(ii). 

 

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 The Cardio Grp., LLC, 2019 USPQ2d 227232, at *2 (TTAB 2019) (quoting In re WAY Media, LLC, 118 USPQ2d 1697, 1698 (TTAB 2016)); 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 that 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)).

 

To show a direct association, specimens showing the mark used in rendering the identified services need not explicitly refer to those services, but “there must be something which creates in the mind of the purchaser an association between the mark and the service activity.”  In re The Cardio Grp., LLC, 2019 USPQ2d 227232, at *1 (TTAB 2019) (citing In re WAY Media, LLC, 118 USPQ2d 1697, 1698 (TTAB 2016)).

 

In the present case, the specimen does not show a direct association between the mark and applicant’s services in the identification because although the invoice describes the services as “incorporation of Vestre products into PATHFINDER app. Which measures carbon dioxide in landscape design projects” the applied-for mark, PATHFINDER, is not associated with these services.  Rather, the description on the invoice makes clear the applied-for mark, PATHFINDER, is associated with a software application and not the service in the identification of services.  Furthermore, the services on the invoice appear to be associated with the mark PATH FINDER with design since it is in close proximity to the description of services on the invoice.  In summary, the specimen is not acceptable because the applied-for mark, PATHFINDER is merely used within the description of services to refer to a software application and thus does not show an association between the applied-for mark and applicant’s services of “measuring carbon dioxide in landscape design projects.”

 

In addition, the mark associated with the services shown on the specimen does not match the mark in the drawing.  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(b); TMEP §807.12(a). In this case, the mark associated with the services shown on the specimen displays the mark as PATH FINDER with a space and a diagonal green line. However, the drawing displays the mark as PATHFINDER without a space and without any design elements. The mark on the specimen does not match the mark in the drawing because the literal elements of the mark in the drawing neither has a space between PATH and FINDER nor the diagonal green line whereas the literal elements of the mark in the specimen does have a space between PATH and FINDER and a diagonal green line. Applicant has thus failed to provide the required evidence of use of the mark in commerce. See TMEP §807.12(a).

 

Examples of specimens.  Specimens for services must show a direct association between the mark and the services and include:  (1) copies of advertising and marketing material, (2) a photograph of business signage or billboards, or (3) materials showing the mark in the sale, rendering, or advertising of the services.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(2), (c); TMEP §1301.04(a), (h)(iv)(C).  Any webpage printout or screenshot submitted as a specimen must include the webpage’s URL and the date it was accessed or printed on the specimen itself, within the TEAS form that submits the specimen, or in a verified statement under 37 C.F.R. §2.20 or 28 U.S.C. §1746 in a later-filed response.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(c); TMEP §§904.03(i), 1301.04(a).

 

Response option.  Applicant may respond to this refusal by submitting, for each applicable international class, a different specimen (a verified “substitute” specimen) that (a) was in actual use in commerce prior to the expiration of the deadline for filing the statement of use and (b) shows the mark in actual use in commerce for the services identified in the statement of 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 prior to expiration of the filing deadline for filing a statement of use.”  The substitute specimen cannot be accepted without this statement.

 

Applicant may not withdraw the statement of use.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.88(f); TMEP §1109.17.

 

For an overview of this response option and instructions on how to submit a different specimen using the online Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Specimen webpage.

 

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).

 

 

Biftu, Beniam

/Ben Biftu/

Trademark Examining Attorney

United States Patent & Trademark Office

Law Office 117

571-272-1525

bbiftu@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.  

 

 

 

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88614437 - PATHFINDER - N/A

To: Pamela Conrad (tmls@coblentzlaw.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88614437 - PATHFINDER - N/A
Sent: May 12, 2021 08:26:25 AM
Sent As: ecom117@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on May 12, 2021 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88614437

 

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. 

 

 

Biftu, Beniam

/Ben Biftu/

Trademark Examining Attorney

United States Patent & Trademark Office

Law Office 117

571-272-1525

bbiftu@uspto

 

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 May 12, 2021, 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.”

 

 

 


uspto.report is an independent third-party trademark research tool that is not affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or any other governmental organization. The information provided by uspto.report is based on publicly available data at the time of writing and is intended for informational purposes only.

While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information displayed on this site. The use of this site is at your own risk. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

All official trademark data, including owner information, should be verified by visiting the official USPTO website at www.uspto.gov. This site is not intended to replace professional legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for consulting with a legal professional who is knowledgeable about trademark law.

© 2024 USPTO.report | Privacy Policy | Resources | RSS Feed of Trademarks | Trademark Filings Twitter Feed