Offc Action Outgoing

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

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

 

 

 

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:  January 17, 2020

 

The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney.  Applicant must respond timely and completely to the issues 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 Not Entitled to Register – Prior–filed Application Pending

·         Disclaimer Required

·         Amended Identification of Goods Required

·         Amended Mark Description and Color Claim Required

 

MARK NOT ENTITLED TO REGISTER – PRIOR-FILED APPLICATION PENDING

 

The trademark examining attorney has searched the USPTO’s database of registered and pending marks and has found no similar registered marks that would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d).  TMEP §704.02; see 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).  However, a mark in a prior-filed pending application may present a bar to registration of applicant’s mark.

 

The filing date of pending U.S. Application Serial No. 79255068 precedes applicant’s filing date.  See attached referenced application.  If the mark in the referenced application registers, applicant’s mark may be refused registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d) because of a likelihood of confusion between the two marks.  See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); 37 C.F.R. §2.83; TMEP §§1208 et seq.  Therefore, upon receipt of applicant’s response to this Office action, action on this application may be suspended pending final disposition of the earlier-filed referenced application.

 

In response to this Office action, applicant may present arguments in support of registration by addressing the issue of the potential conflict between applicant’s mark and the mark in the referenced application.  Applicant’s election not to submit arguments at this time in no way limits applicant’s right to address this issue later if a refusal under Section 2(d) issues.

 

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 “STEEL” and “SQUARE TOE SAFETY BOOT” 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.  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 wording “STEEL” and “SAFETY BOOT” appears in applicant’s identification of goods.  In addition, the attached evidence from One Country, Keen, Western Boot Barn, Work Boots USA, and Tecovas establishes that this wording is commonly used in connection with similar goods to describe features and characteristics of the goods, namely, boots that have a square toe, include steel in its materials, and are worn for safety purposes.  Thus, the wording merely describes features and characteristics of applicant’s goods.

 

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

 

No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “STEEL” and “SQUARE TOE SAFETY BOOT” 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. 

 

Applicant should note the following additional requirement.

 

AMENDED IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS REQUIRED

 

The wording “protective footwear; safety footwear; safety boots; safety shoes” in the identification of goods in International Class 9 is indefinite and must be clarified because applicant must specify the purpose of the goods.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01. Footwear is classified in International Class 9 only when it serves a specific safety or protective purpose, such as for the prevention of accident or injury or for industrial use.

 

The wording “including” in the identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified deleting this wording.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03(a).  This wording is an open-ended “catch-all” word or phrase (e.g., “etc.,” “and other similar goods,” “and related goods”) that is not acceptable because it fails to identify specific goods.  See TMEP §1402.03(a).

 

In an identification, an applicant must use the common commercial or generic name for the goods, be specific and all-inclusive, and avoid using indefinite words or phrases.  TMEP§§1402.01, 1402.03(a).  Further, applicant may amend the identification to list only those items that are within the scope of the goods set forth in the initial application or as acceptably amended.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §§1402.06 et seq., 1402.07.  Scope is generally determined by the ordinary meaning of the wording in the identification.  TMEP §1402.07(a).

 

The wording “industrial footwear, industrial boots, industrial shoes” in the identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified because applicant must clarify the purpose of these goods as not for protective purposes for proper classification in International Class 25.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01.  Footwear that is for protective purposes is classified in International Class 9.

 

Applicant may adopt the following wording, if accurate, with changes in bold:

 

International Class 9:              protective industrial footwear; safety footwear for the prevention of accident or injury; safety boots for the prevention of accident or injury; safety shoes for the prevention of accident or injury; footwear for protection against accidents, irradiation and fire, namely, including boots and shoes for protection against accidents for use in industry; boots and shoes for protection against accidents for use at work

 

International Class 25:            footwear; boots, shoes, heavy duty footwear, non-protective industrial footwear, non-protective industrial boots, non-protective industrial shoes, work boots, work shoes, boots containing a reinforced toe cap, shoes containing a reinforced toe cap, steel-capped boots, steel-capped shoes, water-impervious footwear and hiking boots

 

Applicant may amend the identification to clarify or limit the goods, but not to broaden or expand the goods beyond those in the original application or as acceptably amended.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06.  Generally, any deleted goods may not later be reinserted.  See TMEP §1402.07(e).

 

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

 

Applicant should note the following additional requirement.

 

AMENDED COLOR CLAIM AND MARK DESCRIPTION REQUIRED

 

The drawing shows the applied-for mark in various colors, including white; however, the color claim and description of the mark do not reference the color white.  The color claim and description must be complete and reference all the colors in the mark.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.37, 2.52(b)(1); TMEP §§807.07(a) et seq.  Therefore, applicant must clarify whether white is used as a color in the mark or to indicate background, outlining, shading, and/or transparent areas.  TMEP §807.07(d); see 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b).

 

To clarify how white is being used in the mark, applicant may satisfy one of the following:

 

(1)        If white is a feature of the mark, applicant must amend the color claim to include them and amend the description to identify where black, white and/or gray appear in the literal and/or design elements of the mark.  The following color claim and description are suggested, if accurate:

 

Color claim:  “The colors white, blue, and red are claimed as a feature of the mark.”

 

Description:  “The mark consists of a design of a dog’s head in blue and white to the left of the stylized wording “STEEL BLUE” with “STEEL” in white appearing inside a red rectangle above “BLUE” in blue, all appearing above the stylized wording “BLUE HEELER” with “BLUE” in blue and “HEELER” in red and the stylized wording “SQUARE TOE SAFETY BOOT” below appearing all in blue except the wording “SAFETY” appears in red.”

 

(2)        If white is not a feature of the mark, applicant must amend the description to state that white represents background, outlining, shading and/or transparent areas and is not part of the mark.  The following description is suggested, if accurate:

 

Color claim:  “The colors white and red are claimed as a feature of the mark.”

 

Description:  “The mark consists of a design of a dog’s head in blue to the left of the stylized wording “STEEL BLUE” with “STEEL” in stencil lettering appearing inside a red rectangle above “BLUE” in blue, all appearing above the stylized wording “BLUE HEELER” with “BLUE” in blue and “HEELER” in red and the stylized wording “SQUARE TOE SAFETY BOOT” below appearing all in blue except the wording “SAFETY” appears in red. The color white represents background, outlining, shading, and/or transparent areas and is not part of the mark.”

 

TMEP §807.07(d).

 

HOW TO RESPOND TO THIS OFFICE ACTION

 

Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action.    

 

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.  

 

 

/Hannah Gilbert/

Hannah Gilbert

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 121

(571) 272-5029

hannah.gilbert@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.  

 

• Responses signed by an unauthorized party are not accepted and can cause the application to abandon.  If applicant does not have an attorney, the response must be signed by the individual applicant, all joint applicants, or someone with legal authority to bind a juristic applicant.  If applicant has an attorney, the response must be signed by the attorney.

 

• If needed, find contact information for the supervisor of the office or unit listed in the signature block.

 

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on January 17, 2020 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88649525

 

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. 

 

 

/Hannah Gilbert/

Hannah Gilbert

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 121

(571) 272-5029

hannah.gilbert@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 January 17, 2020, 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.”