To: | Western Legacy Sales, LLC (jim@waltonpllc.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88668708 - DOUBLE SLING - 1134-61194-2 |
Sent: | December 23, 2019 08:28:26 AM |
Sent As: | ecom125@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. 88668708
Mark: DOUBLE SLING
|
|
Correspondence Address: LAW OFFICES OF JAMES E. WALTON, P.L.L.C. 1169 N. BURLESON BLVD., SUITE 107-328
|
|
Applicant: Western Legacy Sales, LLC
|
|
Reference/Docket No. 1134-61194-2
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 23, 2019
The referenced application 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.
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 the present case, applicant seeks registration of the mark DOUBLE SLING (in standard characters) for “Equine support boots, namely, equine leg wraps” in International Class 18.
Only where the combination of descriptive terms creates a unitary mark with a unique, incongruous, or otherwise nondescriptive meaning in relation to the goods 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 do not create a unique, incongruous, or nondescriptive meaning in relation to the goods. Specifically, the attached dictionary definitions show that the wording “DOUBLE” and “SLING” are defined as follows:
double: “Consisting of two equal, identical, or similar parts or things”
sling: “A flexible strap or belt used in the form of a loop to support or raise a hanging weight”
Thus, the wording “DOUBLE” and “SLING” merely describes a feature or characteristic of applicant’s goods, namely, equine leg wraps that feature two straps designed to support the weight of equine legs.
Accordingly, the proposed mark DOUBLE SLING is merely descriptive, and registration is properly refused on the Principal Register under Section 2(e)(1).
SECTION 2(f) ACQUIRED DISTINCTIVENESS – ADVISORY
The application record indicates that applicant has used its mark for a long time; therefore, applicant has the option to amend the application to assert a claim of acquired distinctiveness under Trademark Act Section 2(f). See 15 U.S.C. §1052(f); TMEP §1212.05.
To amend the application to Section 2(f) based on five years’ use, applicant should request that the application be amended to assert a claim of acquired distinctiveness under Section 2(f) and submit the following written statement claiming acquired distinctiveness, if accurate:
The mark has become distinctive of the goods and/or services through the applicant’s substantially exclusive and continuous use of the mark in commerce that the U.S. Congress may lawfully regulate for at least the five years immediately before the date of this statement.
TMEP §1212.05(d); see 15 U.S.C. §1052(f); 37 C.F.R. §2.41(a)(2); TMEP §1212.08. This statement must be verified with an affidavit or signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20. 37 C.F.R. §2.41(a)(2); TMEP §1212.05(d); see 37 C.F.R. §2.193(e)(1).
CONDITIONAL DISCLAIMER
Applicant may submit a disclaimer in the following format:
No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “SLING” 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.
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.
/Melissa Sturman/
Melissa Sturman
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 125
(571) 272-2781
melissa.sturman@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE