To: | Crayola Properties, Inc. (lisa.schuver@hallmark.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88634401 - SPARKLE SIGNS - RR 44296 |
Sent: | December 31, 2019 01:52:26 PM |
Sent As: | ecom109@uspto.gov |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 Attachment - 5 Attachment - 6 Attachment - 7 Attachment - 8 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88634401
Mark: SPARKLE SIGNS
|
|
Correspondence Address: |
|
Applicant: Crayola Properties, Inc.
|
|
Reference/Docket No. RR 44296
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 31, 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).
SECTION 2(e)(1) REFUSAL - MERELY DESCRIPTIVE
“Whether consumers could guess what the product [or service] is from consideration of the mark alone is not the test.” In re Am. Greetings Corp., 226 USPQ 365, 366 (TTAB 1985).
In this case, applicant has applied to register the mark “SPARKLE SIGNS” for use in connection with:
“Arts and craft clay kits” in International Class 16.
Specifically, the words “SPARKLE” and “SIGNS” are merely descriptive of the above listed goods and/or services because the words “SPARKLE” and “SIGNS” are commonly associated with “arts and craft” kits. See evidence addressed below showing common usage of the words “SPARKLE” and “SIGNS” in the marketplace. Therefore, the words “SPARKLE” and “SIGNS” describe a feature, function, characteristic and purpose of applicant’s goods and/or services.
More specifically, the word(s) “SPARKLE” and “SIGNS” are defined as follows:
SPARKLE: to shine with small points of reflected light (See attached http://onelook.com/?w=sparkle&ls=a).
SIGNS: a displayed structure bearing lettering or symbols (See attached http://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=sign).
Not only do the ordinary dictionary definitions show that the words “SPARKLE” and “SIGNS” together are merely descriptive of a feature, characteristic, purpose, and function of applicant’s goods and/or services such as its “arts and craft clay kits”, but applicant’s specimen further describes applicant’s goods as “an innovative glitter-infused dot that sticks to a variety of surfaces to make sparkly designs” used to let “kids create dazzling signs they can hang in their room”. See applicant’s specimen. Moreover, the attached evidence also shows that the words “SPARKLE” and “SIGNS” are commonly associated with a feature of arts and craft kits including clay. See the following attached evidence:
Only where the combination of descriptive terms creates a unitary mark with a unique, incongruous, or otherwise nondescriptive meaning in relation to the goods and/or services is the combined mark registrable. See In re Colonial Stores, Inc., 394 F.2d 549, 551, 157 USPQ 382, 384 (C.C.P.A. 1968); In re Positec Grp. Ltd., 108 USPQ2d 1161, 1162-63 (TTAB 2013).
In this case, both the individual components and the composite result are descriptive of applicant’s goods and/or services and the wording “SPARKLE SIGNS” fails to create a unique, incongruous, or nondescriptive meaning in relation to the goods. Thus, the applied-for mark is refused under Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act.
SUPPLEMENTAL REGISTER-ADVISORY
To amend the application to the Supplemental Register, applicant must provide a written statement requesting that the application be amended to the Supplemental Register. TMEP §816.01; see 15 U.S.C. §1091; 37 C.F.R. §2.47.
Applicant is advised that, if the application is amended to seek registration on the Supplemental Register, applicant will be required to disclaim “SIGNS” because such wording appears to be generic in the context of applicant’s goods and/or services. See 15 U.S.C. §1056(a); In re Wella Corp., 565 F.2d 143, 144, 196 USPQ 7, 8 (C.C.P.A. 1977); In re Creative Goldsmiths of Wash., Inc., 229 USPQ 766, 768 (TTAB 1986); TMEP §1213.03(b).
Applicant may submit a disclaimer in the following format:
No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “SIGNS” apart from the mark as shown.
TMEP §1213.08(a)(i).
For an overview of disclaimers and instructions on how to satisfy this issue using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), see the Disclaimer webpage.
RESPONSE GUIDELINES
Please call or email the assigned trademark examining attorney with questions about this Office action. Although the trademark examining attorney cannot provide legal advice or statements about applicant’s rights, the trademark examining attorney can provide applicant with additional explanation about the refusal(s) and/or requirement(s) in this Office action. See TMEP §§705.02, 709.06. Although the USPTO does not accept emails as responses to Office actions, emails can be used for informal communications and will be included in the application record. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(c), 2.191; TMEP §§304.01-.02, 709.04-.05.
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.
/Carolyn Wlodarczyk/
Carolyn Wlodarczyk
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 109
571-272-9273
carolyn.wlodarczyk@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE