To: | Lee, Alexander (Angrychickencs@gmail.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88761417 - ANGRY CHICKEN - N/A |
Sent: | April 11, 2020 09:34:47 AM |
Sent As: | ecom128@uspto.gov |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 Attachment - 5 Attachment - 6 Attachment - 7 Attachment - 8 Attachment - 9 Attachment - 10 Attachment - 11 Attachment - 12 Attachment - 13 Attachment - 14 Attachment - 15 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88761417
Mark: ANGRY CHICKEN
|
|
Correspondence Address: |
|
Applicant: Lee, Alexander
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N/A
Correspondence Email Address: |
|
PRIORITY ACTION
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: April 11, 2020
USPTO database searched; no conflicting marks found. The trademark examining attorney searched the USPTO database of registered and pending marks and found no conflicting marks that would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d). 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); TMEP §704.02.
Applicant must address issues shown below. On April 6th, 2020, the examining attorney and Alex Lee discussed the issues below. Applicant must timely respond to these issues. See 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §2.62(a); TMEP §708.05.
DISCLAIMER
The attached evidence from the Collins Dictionary shows that “CHICKENS” are “birds which are kept on a farm for their eggs and for their meat” and “CHICKEN” is the flesh of this bird eaten as food. As identified in the application, applicant’s services are those of a “Korean Chicken Restaurant.” Thus, the wording merely describes applicant’s services because it immediately conveys to consumers that applicant’s services feature the cooked flesh of a bird eaten as food.
Applicant may respond to this issue by submitting a disclaimer in the following format:
No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “CHICKEN” apart from the mark as shown.
For an overview of disclaimers and instructions on how to provide one using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), see the Disclaimer webpage.
COLOR CLAIM & MARK DESCRIPTION
A complete description must identify all the literal and design elements in the mark and specify where the colors appear in those elements. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.37, 2.52(b)(1); TMEP §§807.07(a) et seq. If black, white, and/or gray are not being claimed as a color feature of the mark, applicant must exclude them from the color claim and include in the description a statement that black, white, and/or gray represent background, outlining, shading, and/or transparent areas and are not part of the mark. See TMEP §807.07(d).
The following color claim and mark description are suggested, if accurate:
The colors black, red, orange, gray, yellow, and white are claimed as a feature of the mark.
The mark consists of the wording “ANGRY CHICKEN” in stylized text where “ANGRY” appears above the top of the letter “C” in chicken. The word “ANGRY” appears outlined in black and white and shaded in red, orange, and yellow, and the word “CHICKEN” appears in black. Lines depicting flames and feathers appear in orange, yellow, red, and gray, emanating from the stylized wording to the right of the design. A stylized chicken design outlined in black and shaded in orange, red, gray, and white, faces away from the wording and forms the curve of the letter “C” of “CHICKEN”.
CONCLUSION
Response guidelines. For this application to proceed, applicant must explicitly address each refusal and/or requirement in this Office action. For a refusal, applicant may provide written arguments and evidence against the refusal, and may have other response options if specified above. For a requirement, applicant should set forth the changes or statements. Please see “Responding to Office Actions” and the informational video “Response to Office Action” for more information and tips on responding.
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.
Because of the legal technicalities and strict deadlines of the trademark application process, applicant is encouraged to hire a private attorney who specializes in trademark matters to assist in this process. The assigned trademark examining attorney can provide only limited assistance explaining the content of an Office action and the application process. USPTO staff cannot provide legal advice or statements about an applicant’s legal rights. TMEP §§705.02, 709.06. See Hiring a U.S.-licensed trademark attorney for more information.
How to respond. Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action.
/Jillian Renee Burch/
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 128
571-272-3384
jillian.burch@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE