Offc Action Outgoing

ACXIOM REALID

Acxiom LLC

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88636435 - ACXIOM REALID - N/A

To: Acxiom LLC (jdougherty@wlj.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88636435 - ACXIOM REALID - N/A
Sent: December 21, 2019 07:53:51 PM
Sent As: ecom117@uspto.gov
Attachments: Attachment - 1
Attachment - 2
Attachment - 3

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

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

 

U.S. Application Serial No. 88636435

 

Mark:  ACXIOM REALID

 

 

 

 

Correspondence Address: 

J. CHARLES DOUGHERTY

WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS LLP

200 W. CAPITOL AVE. STE. 2300

LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201

 

 

 

Applicant:  Acxiom LLC

 

 

 

Reference/Docket No. N/A

 

Correspondence Email Address: 

 jdougherty@wlj.com

 

 

 

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 21, 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

 

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).

 

DISCLAIMER REQUIRED

 

Applicant must provide a disclaimer of the unregistrable part(s) of the applied-for mark even though the mark as a whole appears to be registrable.  See 15 U.S.C. §1056(a); TMEP §§1213, 1213.03(a).  A disclaimer of an unregistrable part of a mark will not affect the mark’s appearance.  See Schwarzkopf v. John H. Breck, Inc., 340 F.2d 978, 979-80, 144 USPQ 433, 433 (C.C.P.A. 1965).

 

In this case, applicant must disclaim the wording “REALID” 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 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 from the Dept. of Homeland Security shows that “REAL ID” references a government program that “establishes minimum security standards for license issuance and production.” See http://www.dhs.gov/real-id  Furthermore, the term “REAL ID” is widely recognized as associate with the government program. See attached advertisements from washingtonpost.com and wikipedia.com. Thus, the wording merely describes applicant’s services because it informs consumers that the applicant’s marketing related services include verification of identities.

 

Applicant may respond to this issue by submitting a disclaimer in the following format: 

 

No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “REALID” 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. 

 

IDENTIFICATION

 

Certain terms in the identification are unclear and require clarification because the nature of the services intended is unclear or the services are described so broadly that they may include terms correctly classified in additional classes.  Each identification must be specific, all-inclusive and list the common commercial names of the applicant’s services in a fashion that would be easily understood by the purchasing public. 

 

Following, the examiner highlights those unclear terms through suggestions for better terminology (in their appropriate class) below.  Unclear or indefinite terms are listed in italics followed by suggested language and corrected classification, if applicable, in bold. The portions of the identification that are acceptable are repeated as originally listed in the application. 

 

International Class 42

 

Applicant applied for the following: marketing technology services, namely, consumer data hygiene services, data suppression services, consumer resolution and recognition services to recognize consumers across devices and channels, technology services to support marketing campaigns, next best offer services, website personalization, and lookalike consumer audience construction

 

“Marketing technology” “consumer data hygiene” and other services listed in the identification are unclear.  Applicant must specify the nature of the underlying services by common commercial name for notice and classification purposes. Applicant may adopt the following identification(s) in the specified international class(es), if accurate:

 

marketing technology services, namely, consumer data hygiene services, data suppression services - Data mining services, namely, consumer data hygiene services and data suppression services – in Class 42

 

technology services to support marketing campaigns - Technical consulting in the field of marketing to support marketing campaigns – in Class 35

 

next best offer services Marketing plan development, namely, next best offer services – in Class 35

 

website personalization Developing customized web pages featuring user-defined information in the field of {indicate types of information, e.g., personal interests and hobbies, etc.} - in Class 42

 

With respect to the wording “consumer resolution and recognition services to recognize consumers across devices and channels” and lookalike consumer audience construction - Generally, a trademark examining attorney will recommend acceptable substitute wording for unacceptable identifications of services.  In this case, however, because the nature of the services is unclear from the application record, the trademark examining attorney is unable to suggest any alternative wording.  See TMEP §1402.01(e).

 

International Class 45

 

Applicant applied for the following: risk mitigation services in the nature of facilitating compliance with data privacy regulations and data ethics best practices

 

risk mitigation services in the nature of facilitating compliance with data privacy regulations and data ethics best practices - Suggested amendment: Risk mitigation services, namely, regulatory compliance consulting in the field of data privacy regulations and data ethics best practices – in Class 45

 

In sum, applicant may amend to the following, overall, if accurate:

 

CLASS 35: Technical consulting in the field of marketing to support marketing campaigns; Marketing plan development, namely, next best offer services

 

CLASS 42:  Data mining services, namely, consumer data hygiene services, data suppression services; Developing customized web pages featuring user-defined information in the field of {indicate types of information, e.g., personal interests and hobbies, etc.}

 

CLASS 45: Risk mitigation services, namely, regulatory compliance consulting in the field of data privacy regulations and data ethics best practices

 

Note, if applicant accepts the suggested identification(s), Applicant must amend the application to classify the services in the listed International Class.  37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(7) and 2.85; TMEP §§1401.02(a) and 1401.03(b).

 

Identification Manual

 

For assistance with identifying and classifying services in trademark applications, please see the USPTO’s online searchable U.S. Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual.  See TMEP §1402.04.

 

Amending Identification/Broadening Scope

 

Applicant’s services may be clarified or limited, but may not be expanded beyond those originally itemized in the application or as acceptably amended.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06.  Applicant may clarify or limit the identification by inserting qualifying language or deleting items to result in a more specific identification; however, applicant may not substitute different services or add services not found or encompassed by those in the original application or as acceptably amended.  See TMEP §1402.06(a)-(b).  The scope of the services sets the outer limit for any changes to the identification and is generally determined by the ordinary meaning of the wording in the identification.  TMEP §§1402.06(b), 1402.07(a)-(b).  Any acceptable changes to the services will further limit scope, and once services are deleted, they are not permitted to be reinserted.  TMEP §1402.07(e).

 

MULTIPLE APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS

 

The application identifies services in more than one international class; therefore, applicant must satisfy all the requirements below for each international class based on Trademark Act Section 1(b):

 

(1)       List the goods and/or services by their international class number in consecutive numerical order, starting with the lowest numbered class.

 

(2)       Submit a filing fee for each international class not covered by the fee(s) already paid (view the USPTO’s current fee schedule).  The application identifies services that are classified in at least 3 classes; however, applicant submitted a fee(s) sufficient for only 2 class(es).  Applicant must either submit the filing fees for the classes not covered by the submitted fees or restrict the application to the number of classes covered by the fees already paid.

 

See 15 U.S.C. §§1051(b), 1112, 1126(e); 37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(6)-(7), 2.34(a)(2)-(3), 2.86(a); TMEP §§1403.01, 1403.02(c).

 

See an overview of the requirements for a Section 1(b) multiple-class application and how to satisfy the requirements online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form.

 

PLEASE NOTE:

 

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.    

 

 

/C. S. Young/

Examining Attorney

(571) 272-9713

skye.young@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.  

 

 

 

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88636435 - ACXIOM REALID - N/A

To: Acxiom LLC (jdougherty@wlj.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88636435 - ACXIOM REALID - N/A
Sent: December 21, 2019 07:53:52 PM
Sent As: ecom117@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on December 21, 2019 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88636435

 

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. 

 

 

/C. S. Young/

Examining Attorney

(571) 272-9713

skye.young@uspto.gov

 

 

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 December 21, 2019, 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