To: | Colgate-Palmolive Company (melissa_antonecchia@colpal.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88617025 - COLGATE, VEGAN, RESPONSIBLY MADE, - N/A |
Sent: | November 29, 2019 11:26:30 AM |
Sent As: | ecom107@uspto.gov |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88617025
Mark: COLGATE, VEGAN, RESPONSIBLY MADE,
|
|
Correspondence Address:
|
|
Applicant: Colgate-Palmolive Company
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N/A
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 29, 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.
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:
DISCLAIMER REQUIRED
In this case, applicant must disclaim the wording “VEGAN”, “GLUTEN FREE”, and “SUGAR FREE” because it is not inherently distinctive. These unregistrable term(s) at best are merely descriptive of an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose, or use of applicant’s goods and/or services. See 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd., 695 F.3d 1247, 1251, 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1755 (Fed. Cir. 2012); TMEP §§1213, 1213.03(a).
The attached evidence shows this wording is commonly used in connection with similar goods to describe ingredients. For purposes of evaluating a trademark, material obtained from the Internet is generally accepted as competent evidence. See In re Bayer Aktiengesellschaft, 488 F.3d 960, 966, 82 USPQ2d 1828, 1833 (Fed. Cir. 2007); In re Reed Elsevier Props., Inc., 482 F.3d 1376, 1380, 82 USPQ2d 1378, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2007); TBMP §1208.03; TMEP §710.01(b). Thus, the wording merely describes applicant’s goods and must be disclaimed.
Applicant may respond to this issue by submitting a disclaimer in the following format:
No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “VEGAN”, “RESPONSIBLY MADE”, and “GLUTEN FREE” apart from the mark as shown.
For an overview of disclaimers and instructions on how to satisfy this issue using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), see the Disclaimer webpage.
MARK DESCRIPTION REQUIRED
The following description is suggested, if accurate: The mark consists of a red curved band with the thickest portion along the bottom featuring the white stylized wording “COLGATE” and a white curved band under the wording resembling a smile. Within the vertically ascending sides of the red curved band are three incomplete light blue plain line circles. The leftmost circle features two light blue leaves above the light blue wording “VEGAN”. The middle circle features a light blue hand holding a light blue globe above the light blue wording “RESPONSIBLY MADE” and the rightmost circle features a light blue diagonal and light blue shaft of wheat above the light blue wording “GLUTEN FREE”. All the other white areas of the mark represent background and are not claimed as a feature of the mark.
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.
/Cynthia R. Smith/
Law Office 107
cynthia.smith@uspto.gov
(571) 272-4685
RESPONSE GUIDANCE