UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 88129887
MARK: B100
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: |
CLICK HERE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER: http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp
|
APPLICANT: Arash Bereliani MD, a medical corporatio ETC.
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS: |
|
OFFICE ACTION
TO AVOID ABANDONMENT OF APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION, THE USPTO MUST RECEIVE APPLICANT’S COMPLETE RESPONSE TO THIS LETTER WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF THE ISSUE/MAILING DATE BELOW. A RESPONSE TRANSMITTED THROUGH THE TRADEMARK ELECTRONIC APPLICATION SYSTEM (TEAS) MUST BE RECEIVED BEFORE MIDNIGHT EASTERN TIME OF THE LAST DAY OF THE RESPONSE PERIOD.
ISSUE/MAILING DATE: 1/16/2019
Section 2(d) Refusal – Likelihood of Confusion – partial refusal
Trademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration of an applied-for mark that is so similar to a registered mark that it is likely consumers would be confused, mistaken, or deceived as to the commercial source of the goods and/or services of the parties. See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d). Likelihood of confusion is determined on a case-by-case basis by applying the factors set forth in In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 1361, 177 USPQ 563, 567 (C.C.P.A. 1973) (called the “du Pont factors”). In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1322, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1747 (Fed. Cir. 2017). Only those factors that are “relevant and of record” need be considered. M2 Software, Inc. v. M2 Commc’ns, Inc., 450 F.3d 1378, 1382, 78 USPQ2d 1944, 1947 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (citing Shen Mfg. Co. v. Ritz Hotel Ltd., 393 F.3d 1238, 1241, 73 USPQ2d 1350, 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2004)); see In re Inn at St. John’s, LLC, 126 USPQ2d 1742, 1744 (TTAB 2018).
Although not all du Pont factors may be relevant, there are generally two key considerations in any likelihood of confusion analysis: (1) the similarities between the compared marks and (2) the relatedness of the compared goods and/or services. See In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d at 1322, 123 USPQ2d at 1747 (quoting Herbko Int’l, Inc. v. Kappa Books, Inc., 308 F.3d 1156, 1164-65, 64 USPQ2d 1375, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2002)); Federated Foods, Inc. v. Fort Howard Paper Co.,544 F.2d 1098, 1103, 192 USPQ 24, 29 (C.C.P.A. 1976) (“The fundamental inquiry mandated by [Section] 2(d) goes to the cumulative effect of differences in the essential characteristics of the goods [or services] and differences in the marks.”); TMEP §1207.01.
Comparison of the Marks
Marks are compared in their entireties for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression. Stone Lion Capital Partners, LP v. Lion Capital LLP, 746 F.3d 1317, 1321, 110 USPQ2d 1157, 1160 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (quoting Palm Bay Imps., Inc. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee En 1772, 396 F.3d 1369, 1371, 73 USPQ2d 1689, 1691 (Fed. Cir. 2005)); TMEP §1207.01(b)-(b)(v). “Similarity in any one of these elements may be sufficient to find the marks confusingly similar.” In re Inn at St. John’s, LLC, 126 USPQ2d 1742, 1746 (TTAB 2018) (citing In re Davia, 110 USPQ2d 1810, 1812 (TTAB 2014)); TMEP §1207.01(b).
Applicant’s mark is solely comprised of the wording “B100” in standard character form, and registrant’s mark is solely comprised of the virtual identical wording “B-100” in typed drawing form. Because of this shared virtually identical wording, these marks are likely to engender the same connotation and overall commercial impression when considered in connection with applicant’s and registrant’s respective goods and/or services. See In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 116 USPQ2d 1406, 1411 (TTAB 2015), aff’d, 866 F.3d 1315, 123 USPQ2d 1744 (Fed. Cir. 2017) Seaguard Corp. v. Seaward Int’l, Inc., 223 USPQ 48, 51 (TTAB 1984) (“[T]he marks ‘SEAGUARD’ and ‘SEA GUARD’ are, in contemplation of law, identical [internal citation omitted].”); In re Best W. Family Steak House, Inc., 222 USPQ 827, 827 (TTAB 1984) (“There can be little doubt that the marks [BEEFMASTER and BEEF MASTER] are practically identical”); Stock Pot, Inc., v. Stockpot Rest., Inc., 220 USPQ 52, 52 (TTAB 1983), aff’d 737 F.2d 1576, 222 USPQ 665 (Fed. Cir. 1984) (“There is no question that the marks of the parties [STOCKPOT and STOCK POT] are confusingly similar. The word marks are phonetically identical and visually almost identical.”).
Accordingly, applicant’s mark and registrant’s mark are confusingly similar.
Comparison of the Goods/Services
Applicant identifies the following services of relevance to this refusal:
Class 9: … Educational services, namely, conducting seminars in the field of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine and lifestyle wellness; … Providing medical services for the prevention, maintenance, and reversal in the fields of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine and lifestyle wellness; Providing a website, information and informational guidelines in the field of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine and health, namely, providing screening, diagnosis, treatment and health information in text, audio and video-based format to help physicians, patients and the public manage their cardiovascular health ….
Registrant identifies the following goods:
Class 5: NUTRITIONAL SUPPLEMENT CONTAINING VITAMINS.
When analyzing an applicant’s and registrant’s goods and/or services for similarity and relatedness, that determination is based on the description of the goods and/or services in the application and registration at issue, not on extrinsic evidence of actual use. See Stone Lion Capital Partners, LP v. Lion Capital LLP, 746 F.3d 1317, 1323, 110 USPQ2d 1157, 1162 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (quoting Octocom Sys. Inc. v. Hous. Computers Servs. Inc., 918 F.2d 937, 942, 16 USPQ2d 1783, 1787 (Fed. Cir. 1990)).
Additionally, the goods and/or services of the parties have no restrictions as to nature, type, channels of trade, or classes of purchasers and are “presumed to travel in the same channels of trade to the same class of purchasers.” In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Packard Press, Inc., 281 F.3d 1261, 1268, 62 USPQ2d 1001, 1005 (Fed. Cir. 2002)).
The compared goods and/or services need not be identical or even competitive to find a likelihood of confusion. See On-line Careline Inc. v. Am. Online Inc., 229 F.3d 1080, 1086, 56 USPQ2d 1471, 1475 (Fed. Cir. 2000); Recot, Inc. v. Becton, 214 F.3d 1322, 1329, 54 USPQ2d 1894, 1898 (Fed. Cir. 2000); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i). They need only be “related in some manner and/or if the circumstances surrounding their marketing are such that they could give rise to the mistaken belief that [the goods and/or services] emanate from the same source.” Coach Servs., Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356, 1369, 101 USPQ2d 1713, 1722 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting 7-Eleven Inc. v. Wechsler, 83 USPQ2d 1715, 1724 (TTAB 2007)); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i).
Conclusion
For the reasons discussed above, registration is refused under Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act.
Again, the stated refusal refers to the goods and/or services specified above and does not bar registration for applicant’s other goods and/or services. Applicant may respond to the stated refusal by submitting evidence and arguments against the refusal. In addition, applicant may respond by doing one of the following:
(1) Deleting the goods and/or services to which the refusal pertains;
(2) Filing a request to divide out the goods and/or services that have not been refused registration, so that the mark may proceed toward publication for opposition for those goods or services to which the refusal does not pertain. See 37 C.F.R. §2.87. See generally TMEP §§1110 et seq. (regarding the requirements for filing a request to divide). If applicant files a request to divide, then to avoid abandonment, applicant must also file a timely response to all outstanding issues in this Office action, including the refusal. 37 C.F.R. §2.87(e).; or
(3) Amending the basis for the goods and/or services identified in the refusal, if appropriate. TMEP §806.03(h). (The basis cannot be changed for applications filed under Trademark Act Section 66(a). TMEP §1904.01(a).)
However, if applicant responds to the refusal(s), applicant must also respond to the requirement(s) set forth below.
Specimen Issue – Does Not Show Use With SPECIFIC Goods and Services
This refusal applied to all identified goods and/or services, with the exception of the identified “medical services”, which as explained below are properly classified in Class 44. With respect to the other goods and services, however, the specimen does not show the applied-for mark in use in commerce in connection with these goods and/or services because it does not show a direct association between the applied-for mark and any of these identified goods and/or services.
An application based on Trademark Act Section 1(a) must include a specimen showing the applied-for mark in use in commerce for each international class of goods and/or services identified in the application or amendment to allege use. 15 U.S.C. §1051(a)(1); 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a).
Examples of specimens for goods include tags, labels, instruction manuals, containers, photographs that show the mark on the actual goods or packaging, and displays associated with the actual goods at their point of sale. See TMEP §§904.03 et seq. Webpages may also be specimens for goods when they include a picture or textual description of the goods associated with the mark and the means to order the goods. TMEP §904.03(i). Examples of specimens for services include advertising and marketing materials, brochures, photographs of business signage and billboards, and webpages that show the mark used in the actual sale, rendering, or advertising of the services. See TMEP §1301.04(a), (h)(iv)(C). Specimens comprising advertising and promotional materials must show a direct association between the mark and the services. TMEP §1301.04(f)(ii).
With regard to downloadable software in particular, please note that examples of specimens for downloadable software include instruction manuals and screen printouts from (1) web pages showing the mark in connection with ordering or purchasing information or information sufficient to download the software, (2) the actual program that shows the mark in the title bar, or (3) launch screens that show the mark in an introductory message box that appears after opening the program. See TMEP §904.03(e), (i), (j). Webpages may also be specimens for goods when they include a picture or textual description of the goods associated with the mark and the means to order the goods. See In re Sones, 590 F.3d at 1286-89, 93 USPQ2d at 1122-24; In re Azteca Sys., Inc., 102 USPQ2d at 1957; TMEP §§904.03(i) et seq.
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 and/or services 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), for which no specimen is required. This option will later necessitate additional fee(s) and filing requirements such as providing a specimen.
For an overview of both response options referenced above and instructions on how to satisfy either option online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, please go to http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/law/specimen.jsp.
IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS AND SERVICES REQUIREMENT
The identification of goods and services must be clarified because it is indefinite, overbroad, and/or otherwise unacceptable. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01.
Specifically, the wording “Software, web applications and mobile applications for diagnosing and preventing heart disease” is indefinite and overbroad and must be clarified because the wording does not make clear the nature of the software and could identify goods and/or services in two international classes – as a product in International Class 9 or a service in International Class 42. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.03(d), 1402.11(a). Applicant must further clarify the purpose or function of the software, and if content- or field-specific, the content or field of use of the software. TMEP §1402.03(d). The USPTO requires such specificity in identifying computer software in order for a trademark examining attorney to examine the application properly and make appropriate decisions concerning possible conflicts between the applicant’s mark and other marks. See In re N.A.D. Inc., 57 USPQ2d 1872, 1874 (TTAB 2000); TMEP §1402.03(d).
Computer software is a product classified in International Class 9 if it is (1) recorded on media (such as CDs) or (2) downloadable and thus can be transferred or copied from a remote computer system for use on a long-term basis. TMEP §1402.03(d). However, on-line non-downloadable software is considered a computer service in International Class 42, unless it is non-downloadable game software provided online or for temporary use, which is classified in International Class 41. See TMEP §§1402.03(d), 1402.11(a)(xii).
For example, the following are acceptable identifications for software in International Class 9: “desktop publishing software,” “downloadable software for word processing,” and “downloadable mobile applications for managing bank accounts.” Additionally, the following are acceptable identifications for software in International Class 42: “providing temporary use of on-line non-downloadable software development tools” and “providing temporary use of non-downloadable cloud-based software for calculating energy costs.” For assistance with software classification and identifications, please see the USPTO’s online searchable U.S. Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual.
If referring to goods in Class 9, applicant may adopt the following wording, if accurate: “Downloadable software and downloadable mobile applications enabling medical professional users to diagnose and help prevent heart disease”. If referring to services in Class 42, applicant may adopt the following wording, if accurate: “Providing temporary use of online non-downloadable software for use by medical professional users to diagnose and help prevent heart disease”.
The wording “Educational services, namely, conducting seminars in the field of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine and lifestyle wellness” is misclassified, as educational services are properly classified in International Class 41. Applicant may respond by (1) adding International Class 41 to the application and reclassifying these goods and/or services in the proper international class, (2) deleting “Educational services, namely, conducting seminars in the field of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine and lifestyle wellness” from the application, or (3) deleting the remainder of the items in the identification and reclassifying the specified goods and/or services in the proper international class. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.86(a), 6.1; TMEP §§1403.02 et seq. If applicant adds one or more international classes to the application, applicant must comply with the multiple-class requirements specified below in this Office action.
If applicant reclassifies these services in Class 42, applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate: “Educational services, namely, conducting seminars in the fields of cardiology and cardiovascular medicine”.
The wording “Hosting on-line web facilities for individuals and medical practitioners to conduct interactive discussions, namely, the ability to seek and post information related to managing a patient's cardiovascular health” is indefinite and misclassified. This wording is indefinite because the nature of the services is not clear. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01. Applicant must amend this wording to specify the common commercial or generic name of the services. See TMEP §1402.01. If the services have no common commercial or generic name, applicant must describe or explain the nature of the services using clear and succinct language. See id.
Further, this wording is misclassified because the hosting of online web facilities for others is a service properly classified in International Class 42. Applicant may respond by (1) adding International Class 42 to the application and reclassifying these goods and/or services in the proper international class, (2) deleting “Hosting on-line web facilities for individuals and medical practitioners to conduct interactive discussions, namely, the ability to seek and post information related to managing a patient's cardiovascular health” from the application, or (3) deleting the remainder of the items in the identification and reclassifying the specified goods and/or services in the proper international class. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.86(a), 6.1; TMEP §§1403.02 et seq. If applicant adds one or more international classes to the application, applicant must comply with the multiple-class requirements specified below in this Office action.
If applicant reclassifies these services in Class 42, applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate: “computer services, namely, hosting on-line web facilities for medical patients and medical practitioners to conduct interactive discussions related to managing a patient's cardiovascular health”.
In addition, applicant must clarify the wording “providing quality assurance measurement services for medical practitioners and their patients in the field of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine and health” because it is indefinite and too broad. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03. This wording is indefinite because it does not make clear what services are. Further, this wording could identify goods and/or services in more than one international class. For example, “Conducting quality assurance surveys in hospitals to determine service quality” is in International Class 35 while most other quality assurance services are in International Class 42. If referring to services in International Class 35, applicant may adopt the following wording, if accurate: “Conducting quality assurance surveys in hospitals by surveying medical practitioners and their patients to determine service quality in the fields of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine, and cardiovascular health”. If referring to services in International Class 42, applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate: “providing quality assurance services for medical practitioners and their patients in the fields of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine, and cardiovascular health”.
The wording “Providing medical services for the prevention, maintenance, and reversal in the fields of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine and lifestyle wellness” is indefinite and must be clarified because the nature of the services is not clear. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01. Applicant must amend this wording to specify the common commercial or generic name of the services. See TMEP §1402.01. If the services have no common commercial or generic name, applicant must describe or explain the nature of the services using clear and succinct language. See id.
Further, this wording is misclassified, as medical care services are properly classified in International Class 44. Therefore, applicant may respond by (1) adding International Class 44 to the application and reclassifying these goods and/or services in the proper international class, (2) deleting “Providing medical services for the prevention, maintenance, and reversal in the fields of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine and lifestyle wellness” from the application, or (3) deleting the remainder of the items in the identification and reclassifying the specified goods and/or services in the proper international class. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.86(a), 6.1; TMEP §§1403.02 et seq. If applicant adds one or more international classes to the application, applicant must comply with the multiple-class requirements specified below in this Office action.
If applicant reclassifies these services in International Class 44, applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate: “Medical services, namely, providing medical care in the fields of cardiology and cardiovascular medicine”.
Finally, the wording “Providing a website, information and informational guidelines in the field of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine and health, namely, providing screening, diagnosis, treatment and health information in text, audio and video-based format to help physicians, patients and the public manage their cardiovascular health” is indefinite and must be clarified because the nature of the services is not clear. See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01. Applicant must amend this wording to specify the common commercial or generic name of the services. See TMEP §1402.01. If the services have no common commercial or generic name, applicant must describe or explain the nature of the services using clear and succinct language. See id.
Further, this wording is misclassified, as the provision of a website and information in the field of health are services properly classified in International Class 44. Therefore, applicant may respond by (1) adding International Class 44 to the application and reclassifying these goods and/or services in the proper international class, (2) deleting “Providing a website, information and informational guidelines in the field of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine and health, namely, providing screening, diagnosis, treatment and health information in text, audio and video-based format to help physicians, patients and the public manage their cardiovascular health” from the application, or (3) deleting the remainder of the items in the identification and reclassifying the specified goods and/or services in the proper international class. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.86(a), 6.1; TMEP §§1403.02 et seq. If applicant adds one or more international classes to the application, applicant must comply with the multiple-class requirements specified below in this Office action.
If applicant reclassifies these services in International Class 44, applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate: “providing a website featuring information in the fields of cardiology and cardiovascular medicine, namely, providing information related to screening, diagnosis, treatment and health in text, audio and video-based format to help physicians, patients and the public manage their cardiovascular health; providing information in the fields of cardiology and cardiovascular medicine, namely, providing information related to screening, diagnosis, treatment and health in text, audio and video-based format to help physicians, patients and the public manage their cardiovascular health”.
Applicant may adopt the following identification, if accurate:
Class 9: Downloadable software and downloadable mobile applications for use by medical professional users to diagnose and help prevent heart disease
Class 35: Conducting quality assurance surveys in hospitals by surveying medical practitioners and their patients to determine service quality in the fields of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine, and cardiovascular health
Class 41: Educational services, namely, conducting seminars in the fields of cardiology and cardiovascular medicine
Class 42: Providing temporary use of online non-downloadable software for use by medical professional users to diagnose and help prevent heart disease; computer services, namely, hosting on-line web facilities for medical patients and medical practitioners to conduct interactive discussions related to managing a patient's cardiovascular health; providing quality assurance services for medical practitioners and their patients in the fields of cardiology, cardiovascular medicine, and cardiovascular health
Class 44: Medical services, namely, providing medical care in the fields of cardiology and cardiovascular medicine; providing a website featuring information in the fields of cardiology and cardiovascular medicine, namely, providing information related to screening, diagnosis, treatment and health in text, audio and video-based format to help physicians, patients and the public manage their cardiovascular health; providing information in the fields of cardiology and cardiovascular medicine, namely, providing information related to screening, diagnosis, treatment and health in text, audio and video-based format to help physicians, patients and the public manage their cardiovascular health
Stylized text indicates changes.
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.
Multi-Class Application Requirements
The application identifies goods and/or services that are classified in at least 5 classes; however, applicant submitted a fee(s) sufficient for only 1 class(es). In a multiple-class application, a fee for each class is required. 37 C.F.R. §2.86(a)(2), (b)(2); TMEP §§810.01, 1403.01.
Therefore, applicant must either (1) restrict the application to the number of classes covered by the fees already paid, or (2) satisfy all the requirements below for each international class:
(1) List the goods and/or services by their international class number in consecutive numerical order, starting with the lowest numbered class (for example, International Class 3: perfume; International Class 18: cosmetic bags sold empty).
(2) Submit a filing fee for each international class not covered by the fee(s) already paid (view the USPTO’s current fee schedule). Specifically, the application identifies goods and/or services based on use in commerce that are classified in at least 5 classes; however, applicant submitted a fee(s) sufficient for only 1 class(es). Applicant must either (a) submit the filing fees for the classes not covered by the submitted fees or (b) restrict the application to the number of classes covered by the fees already paid.
(3) Submit verified dates of first use of the mark anywhere and in commerce for each international class. See more information about verified dates of use.
(4) Submit a specimen for each international class. The current specimen is acceptable for the “medical services” identified above in International Class 44; however, applicant would need a specimen for the other classes and/or goods and services mentioned above, as necessary. See more information about specimens.
Examples of specimens for goods include tags, labels, instruction manuals, containers, and photographs that show the mark on the actual goods or packaging, or displays associated with the actual goods at their point of sale. Webpages may also be specimens for goods when they include a picture or textual description of the goods associated with the mark and the means to order the goods.
Examples of specimens for services include advertising and marketing materials, brochures, photographs of business signage and billboards, and website printouts that show the mark used in the actual sale, rendering, or advertising of the services.
(5) Submit a verified statement that “The specimen was in use in commerce on or in connection with the goods and/or services listed in the application at least as early as the filing date of the application.” See more information about verification.
See 15 U.S.C. §§1051(a), 1112; 37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(6)-(7), 2.34(a)(1), 2.86(a); TMEP §§904, 1403.01, 1403.02(c).
See an overview of the requirements for a Section 1(a) multiple-class application and how to satisfy the requirements online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form.
RESPONSE GUIDELINES
To expedite prosecution of the application, applicant is encouraged to file its response to this Office action online via the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), which is available at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/index.jsp. If applicant has technical questions about the TEAS response to Office action form, applicant can review the electronic filing tips available online at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/e_filing_tips.jsp and e-mail technical questions to TEAS@uspto.gov.
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.
/Matthew Tully/
Matthew Tully
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 105
(571) 270-5943
TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER: Go to http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp. Please wait 48-72 hours from the issue/mailing date before using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), to allow for necessary system updates of the application. For technical assistance with online forms, e-mail TEAS@uspto.gov. For questions about the Office action itself, please contact the assigned trademark examining attorney. E-mail communications will not be accepted as responses to Office actions; therefore, do not respond to this Office action by e-mail.
All informal e-mail communications relevant to this application will be placed in the official application record.
WHO MUST SIGN THE RESPONSE: It must be personally signed by an individual applicant or someone with legal authority to bind an applicant (i.e., a corporate officer, a general partner, all joint applicants). If an applicant is represented by an attorney, the attorney must sign the response.
PERIODICALLY CHECK THE STATUS OF THE APPLICATION: To ensure that applicant does not miss crucial deadlines or official notices, check the status of the application every three to four months using the Trademark Status and Document Retrieval (TSDR) system at http://tsdr.gov.uspto.report/. Please keep a copy of the TSDR status screen. If the status shows no change for more than six months, contact the Trademark Assistance Center by e-mail at TrademarkAssistanceCenter@uspto.gov or call 1-800-786-9199. For more information on checking status, see http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/process/status/.
TO UPDATE CORRESPONDENCE/E-MAIL ADDRESS: Use the TEAS form at http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/correspondence.jsp.