To: | Near Earth Autonomy, Inc. (pitrademarks@klgates.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 88957841 - PEREGRINE - 200792 |
Sent: | August 13, 2020 06:26:49 PM |
Sent As: | ecom127@uspto.gov |
Attachments: |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 88957841
Mark: PEREGRINE
|
|
Correspondence Address: |
|
Applicant: Near Earth Autonomy, Inc.
|
|
Reference/Docket No. 200792
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: August 13, 2020
The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney. Applicant must respond timely and completely to the issue(s) below. 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.
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.
SUMMARY OF ISSUES:
· Specimen Unacceptable
· Amended Identification Of Goods Required – Partial Requirement
SPECIMEN UNACCEPTABLE
Specifically, applicant submitted an information sheet containing a description of the goods. However, the sheet does not provide the price or means to order the goods. It merely lists applicant’s contact information. A specimen with a telephone number, internet address, and/or mailing address that appears only with corporate contact information may not show sufficient means for ordering the goods. See In re Genitope Corp., 78 USPQ2d 1819, 1822 (TTAB 2006); TMEP §904.03(i)(C)(2). In that circumstance, the specimen may also need to include instructions on how to place an order or an offer to accept orders. See In re Quantum Foods, Inc., 94 USPQ2d 1375, 1379 (TTAB 2010); TMEP §904.03(i)(C)(2). Therefore, the specimen is unacceptable.
Advertising is not acceptable as a specimen for goods. See In re Siny Corp., 920 F.3d 1331, 1336, 2019 USPQ2d 127099, at *2-3 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (citing Powermatics, Inc. v. Globe Roofing Prods. Co., 341 F.2d 127, 130, 144 USPQ 430, 432 (C.C.P.A. 1965)); see also Avakoff v. S. Pac. Co., 765 F.2d 1097, 1098, 226 USPQ 435, 436 (Fed. Cir. 1985); TMEP §904.04(b), (c). Advertising includes online advertising banners appearing on search-engine results pages or in social media, advertising circulars and brochures, price lists, and business cards. See TMEP §904.04(b).
Examples of specimens. Specimens for goods include a photograph 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 webpage 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).
Response options. Applicant may respond to this refusal by satisfying one of the following for each applicable international class:
(1) Submit a different specimen (a verified “substitute” specimen) that (a) was in actual use in commerce at least as early as the filing date of the application or prior to the filing of an amendment to allege use and (b) shows the mark in actual use in commerce for the goods identified in the application or amendment to allege use. A “verified substitute specimen” is a specimen that is accompanied by the following statement made in a signed affidavit or supported by a declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20: “The substitute (or new, or originally submitted, if appropriate) specimen(s) was/were in use in commerce at least as early as the filing date of the application or prior to the filing of the amendment to allege use.” The substitute specimen cannot be accepted without this statement.
(2) Amend the filing basis to intent to use under Section 1(b) (which includes withdrawing an amendment to allege use, if one was filed), as no specimen is required before publication. This option will later necessitate additional fee(s) and filing requirements, including a specimen.
For an overview of the response options referenced above and instructions on how to satisfy these options using the online Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Specimen webpage.
If applicant responds to the refusal, applicant must also respond to the requirement set forth below.
AMENDED IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS REQUIRED – PARTIAL REQUIREMENT
THIS PARTIAL REQUIREMENT APPLIES ONLY TO THE GOODS SPECIFIED THEREIN
Class 9
The wording “autonomous flight systems for aircraft, namely, computer software and hardware for in-flight obstacle detection and avoidance, landing zone evaluation, and vehicle state estimation; navigation, surveying, mapping and inspection apparatus for aircraft, namely, surveying instruments in the nature of mapping sensors, autonomous flight systems comprised of computer software and hardware for aircraft navigation and terrain surveying and mapping, and geophysical survey systems comprised of computer software and hardware for terrain surveying and mapping” in the identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified to specify the nature of the software. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01.
Applicant may adopt the following identification, with changes highlighted in bold, if accurate:
Class 9 – “Autonomous flight systems for aircraft, namely, recorded computer software and hardware for in-flight obstacle detection and avoidance, landing zone evaluation, and vehicle state estimation; navigation, surveying, mapping and inspection apparatus for aircraft, namely, surveying instruments in the nature of mapping sensors, autonomous flight systems comprised of recorded computer software and hardware for aircraft navigation and terrain surveying and mapping, and geophysical survey systems comprised of recorded computer software and hardware for terrain surveying and mapping; 3D position sensing apparatus for aircraft”; and
Class 12 – “Aircraft featuring an apparatus for aerially imaging, surveying and/or mapping terrain, particularly for unmanned rotorcraft; aircraft for autonomously transporting cargo, goods, and people”
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.
How to respond. Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action.
ASSISTANCE
Please call or email the assigned trademark examining attorney with questions about this Office action.
/Evonne M. Neptune/
Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 127
United States Patent and Trademark Office
(571) 270-1740
evonne.neptune@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE