To: | Exactech, Inc. (wstroever@coleschotz.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88644674 - ACTIVE INTELLIGENCE - N/A |
Sent: | May 28, 2020 08:07:35 PM |
Sent As: | ecom126@uspto.gov |
Attachments: |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88644674
Mark: ACTIVE INTELLIGENCE
|
|
Correspondence Address:
|
|
Applicant: Exactech, Inc.
|
|
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: May 28, 2020
The statement of use has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney. Applicant must respond timely and completely to the issue below. 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.
Summary of Issues:
· Mark in Specimen Does Not Match Drawing
Mark in Specimen Does Not Match Drawing
Registration is refused because the specimen does not show the mark in the drawing in use in commerce, which is required in the statement of use. 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). 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(a)-(b); TMEP §807.12(a).
In this case, the specimen displays the mark as POWERING ACTIVE INTELLIGENCE. However, the drawing displays the mark as ACTIVE INTELLIGENCE. The mark on the specimen does not match the mark in the drawing because it adds the word “powering” and makes the mark part of a verb phrase. Applicant has thus failed to provide the required evidence of use of the mark in commerce. See TMEP §807.12(a).
Applicant may respond to this refusal by submitting a different specimen (a verified “substitute” specimen) for each applicable international class that (a) shows the mark in the drawing in actual use in commerce for the goods in the statement of use, and (b) was in actual use in commerce prior to the expiration of the deadline for filing the statement of use. Specimens for goods include photographs of (1) the actual goods bearing the mark; (2) an actual container, packaging, tag or label for the goods bearing the mark; or (3) a point-of-sale display showing the mark directly associated with the goods. See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(1), (c); TMEP §904.03(a)-(m). A webpage specimen submitted as a display associated with the goods must show the mark in association with a picture or textual description of the goods and include information necessary for ordering the goods. TMEP §904.03(i); see 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(1), (c). Any web page printout or screenshot submitted as a specimen must include the webpage’s URL and the date it was accessed or printed. 37 C.F.R. §2.56(c).
Applicant may not, however, withdraw the statement of use. See 37 C.F.R. §2.88(f); TMEP §1109.17.
The USPTO will not accept an amended drawing submitted in response to this refusal because the changes would materially alter the drawing of the mark in the original application or as previously acceptably amended. See 37 C.F.R. §2.72(a)-(b); TMEP §807.14. Specifically, the addition of the word “powering” changes the commercial impression of the mark from a two-word noun phrase to a three-word verb phrase.
For more information about drawings and instructions on how to satisfy these response options using the online Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Drawing webpage.
Advisory – Responding to a Non-Final Office Action
For this application to proceed, applicant must explicitly address each refusal and/or requirement in this Office action.
Please call or email the assigned trademark examining attorney with questions about this Office action. Although an examining attorney cannot provide legal advice, the examining attorney can provide additional explanation about the refusal(s) and/or requirement(s) in this Office action. See TMEP §§705.02, 709.06. The USPTO does not accept emails as responses to Office actions; however, emails can be used for informal communications and are included in the application record. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(c), 2.191; TMEP §§304.01-.02, 709.04-.05.
Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action.
/Sara Anne Helmers/
Sara Helmers (she/her)
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 126
571-270-3639
Sara.Helmers@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE