To: | DIM INVESTMENTS GROUP LLC (dim.r.business@gmail.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88934262 - BLOOD SWEAT RESPECT - N/A |
Sent: | July 28, 2020 05:56:35 PM |
Sent As: | ecom105@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 Attachment - 16 Attachment - 17 Attachment - 18 Attachment - 19 Attachment - 20 Attachment - 21 Attachment - 22 Attachment - 23 Attachment - 24 Attachment - 25 Attachment - 26 Attachment - 27 Attachment - 28 Attachment - 29 Attachment - 30 Attachment - 31 Attachment - 32 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88934262
Mark: BLOOD SWEAT RESPECT
|
|
Correspondence Address:
|
|
Applicant: DIM INVESTMENTS GROUP LLC
|
|
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: July 28, 2020
SEARCH OF USPTO DATABASE OF MARKS
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.
However, the applicant should note the following refusal requirements:
FAILURE TO FUNCTION – WIDELY USED SLOGAN
The applied-for mark is “BLOOD SWEAT RESPECT” in Class 025 for “Hats; Hoodies; Long-sleeved shirts; T-shirts; Tank tops.”
Terms and expressions that merely convey an informational message are not registrable. In re Eagle Crest, Inc., 96 USPQ2d 1227, 1229 (TTAB 2010). Determining whether the term or expression functions as a trademark or service mark depends on how it would be perceived by the relevant public. In re Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 129 USPQ2d at 1150 (citing D.C. One Wholesaler, Inc. v. Chien, 120 USPQ2d 1710, 1713 (TTAB 2016)); In re Eagle Crest, Inc., 96 USPQ2d at 1229; TMEP §1202.04. “The more commonly a [term or expression] is used, the less likely that the public will use it to identify only one source and the less likely that it will be recognized by purchasers as a trademark [or service mark].” In re Hulting, 107 USPQ2d 1175, 1177 (TTAB 2013) (quoting In re Eagle Crest, Inc., 96 USPQ2d at 1229); TMEP §1202.04(b).
The attached evidence from third-party websites shows that this term or expression is commonly used to refer to a common fitness and motivational slogan. Because consumers are accustomed to seeing this term or expression commonly used in everyday speech by many different sources, they would not perceive it as a mark identifying the source of applicant’s goods but rather as only conveying an informational message. For example, applicant will note the following:
· http://www.ebay.com/i/313056705699?chn=ps&var=611761738361
· http://www.amazon.com/s?k=%22blood+sweat+and+respect%22&i=fashion&ref=nb_sb_noss_2
· http://society6.com/product/dwayne-the-rock-johnson-blood-sweat-and-respect_wallpaper
· http://www.redbubble.com/i/sticker/Blood-Sweat-Respect-by-Vitalitee/32810495.EJUG5
· http://represent.com/es/blood-sweat-and-respect-phone-cases
· http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeC8jZhnPas&list=LLezz11T7KiSXPrTLDato8SQ&index=719
· http://www.redbubble.com/i/poster/Blood-Sweat-Respect-by-Vitalitee/32810495.LVTDI
An applicant may not overcome this refusal by amending the application to seek registration on the Supplemental Register or asserting a claim of acquired distinctiveness under Section 2(f). TMEP §1202.04(d); see In re Eagle Crest, Inc., 96 USPQ2d at 1229. Nor will submitting a substitute specimen overcome this refusal. See TMEP §1202.04(d).
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.
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.
How to respond. Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action.
/Sarah E. Kunkleman/
Sarah E. Kunkleman
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 105
571-272-6151
sarah.kunkleman@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE