To: | Pocket Radar Incorporated (Charmaine@Stainbrookllp.com) |
Subject: | U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 88114181 - POCKET RADAR - 01828.T2 |
Sent: | 12/27/2018 8:37:28 AM |
Sent As: | ECOM110@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. 88114181
MARK: POCKET RADAR
|
|
CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS: |
CLICK HERE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER: http://www.gov.uspto.report/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp
|
APPLICANT: Pocket Radar Incorporated
|
|
CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO: CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS: |
|
EXAMINER’S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY ACTION
STRICT DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER
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: 12/27/2018
DATABASE SEARCH: The trademark examining attorney has searched the USPTO’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).
ISSUES APPLICANT MUST ADDRESS: On December 26, 2018, the trademark examining attorney and Charmaine Stainbrook 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, 711.
SUMMARY OF ISSUES THAT APPLICANT MUST ADDRESS
SECTION 2(e)(1) REFUSAL - MERELY DESCRIPTIVE FOR SOME GOODS WITHIN THE IDENTIFICATION
Registration is refused because the applied-for mark merely describes the function of applicant’s goods and/or services. Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); see TMEP §§1209.01(b), 1209.03 et seq. Please note that this refusal does not pertain to “speed measuring devices, namely, radar receivers and transmitters” because a valid claim of acquired distinctiveness has been provided.
The applicant applies to register the mark POCKET RADAR for use in connection with smart digital display screens; downloadable mobile application for the capture, storage and sharing of video, audio and measured data. The mark merely describes the goods as display screens and mobile applications for use in connection with radars that fit in or are the size of a pocket.
Only where the combination of descriptive terms creates a unitary mark with a unique, incongruous, or otherwise nondescriptive meaning in relation to the goods and/or services 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/or services and do not create a unique, incongruous, or nondescriptive meaning in relation to the goods and/or services. Specifically, the words ‘pocket’ and ‘radar’ are defined as follows in Merriam-Webster:
Pocket: a small bag that is sewed or inserted in a garment so that it is open at the top or side.
Radar: a device or system consisting usually of a synchronized radio transmitter and receiver that emits radio waves and processes their reflections for display and is used especially for detecting and locating objects (such as aircraft) or surface features (as of a planet).
The mark merely describes goods which are used in connection with a radar that may be placed or held within one’s pocket. The examining attorney refers to the attached webpages taken from the applicant’s website. The webpages demonstrate that the product is the size of a pocket and that the related accessories including the display screen and mobile application are used in connection with the pocket sized radar.
All of this evidence demonstrates that “POCKET RADAR” is used and understood by consumers to refer to products and accessories relating to a pocket sized radar. Accordingly, the proposed mark POCKET RADAR is merely descriptive, and registration is properly refused on the Principal Register under Section 2(e)(1).
Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal(s) by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration. However, if applicant responds to the refusal(s), applicant must also respond to the requirement(s) set forth below.
DATES OF USE DO NOT SUPPORT SECTION 2(F) CLAIM – FOR SOME ITEMS WITHIN THE IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS
Applicant’s Trademark Act Section 2(f) claim based on five years’ use is insufficient to show acquired distinctiveness because applicant’s dates of use of the mark indicate that applicant has not actually used the mark in commerce for the requisite time period. See 15 U.S.C. §1052(f). For this claim to be accepted, applicant’s substantially exclusive and continuous use of the mark in commerce that the U.S. Congress may lawfully regulate must have been for at least five years before the date on which the claim is made. 15 U.S.C. §1052(f); 37 C.F.R. §2.41(a)(2); TMEP §1212.05. And such use must have been in a type of commerce that may be regulated by the U.S. Congress. See 15 U.S.C. §§1052(f), 1127.
In the present case, applicant asserted a claim of acquired distinctiveness on September 12, 2018. Five years prior to this date would be approximately September 12, 2013. However, the date of first use in commerce specified in the application is November 1, 2016 for some goods, which is less than five years prior to the date the distinctiveness claim was made.
As an alternative to claiming acquired distinctiveness under Section 2(f), applicant may request to amend the application to seek registration on the Supplemental Register. See 15 U.S.C. §1091(a); 37 C.F.R. §§2.47, 2.75(a); TMEP §§801.02(b), 816. To amend to the Supplemental Register, the mark must be in lawful use in commerce; however, no specific length of use is required. See 15 U.S.C. §1091(a); 37 C.F.R. §2.47(a); TMEP §815.02.
The applicant has indicated that the Section 2(f) claim only pertains to some goods within the identification. However, all of the goods listed within the class are descriptive in relation to the applied-for mark. If the applicant cannot establish acquired distinctiveness for the later used products, the applicant may wish to divide these items from the application so that the “speed measuring devices, namely, radar receivers and transmitters” can proceed forward under Section 2(f). The applicant can then amend the mark to the Supplemental Register for the other goods including “smart digital display screens; downloadable mobile application for the capture, storage and sharing of video, audio and measured date” created in the new application.
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).
APPLICATION HAS BEEN AMENDED: In accordance with the authorization granted by the individual identified in the Priority Action section above, the trademark examining attorney has amended the application as indicated below. Please advise the undersigned immediately of any objections. TMEP §707. Any amendments to the identification of goods and/or services may clarify or limit the goods and/or services, but may not add to or broaden the scope of the goods and/or services. 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); see TMEP §§1402.06 et seq.
Disclaimer
The following disclaimer statement is added to the record:
No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “RADAR” apart from the mark as shown.
See 15 U.S.C. §1056(a); TMEP §§1213, 1213.08(a)(i).
Identification of Goods
The identification of goods is amended to read as follows:
“Speed measuring devices namely, radar receivers and transmitters; smart digital display screens; downloadable mobile application for the capture, storage and sharing of video, audio and measured data, in International Class 9.”
See TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.01(e).
RESULT OF NON-RESPONSE
ASSISTANCE
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.
/Tarah Hardy Ludlow/
Examining Attorney
Law Office 110
571-272-9361
tarah.hardy@uspto.gov
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.