Notation to File

MICROKLEAN

Norchem Corporation

Notation to File

NOTE TO THE FILE


SERIAL NUMBER:            90000987

DATE:                                08/20/2020

NAME:                               dcollopy1

NOTE:         

Dear Mr. Minissian,

 

Unfortunately, as indicated in the Office action, I am unable to provide advice on how to respond to your refusal; I am only permitted to explain the contents of the Office action. TMEP §§705.02, 709.06. You may wish to seek the advice of an attorney who specializes in trademark law to provide you with advice specific to your situation.

 

The marks are identical in sound, highly similar in appearance, have an identical meaning,  and are used in connection with closely related products. Thus, the refusal is sound. From a procedural standpoint, the company’s option is to respond to this Office action formally via the TEAS platform with arguments and evidence against the refusal. The link to this platform is included in the Office action. 

 

Further, please be advised that while emails can be used for informal communications to answer questions about the Office action, they cannot be used to request advisory opinions on the likelihood of overcoming a refusal, nor can they be used to respond with arguments against the Office action. TMEP §709.05.

 

Thank you for your understanding,

 

/Diane Collopy/

US Patent & Trademark Office | Trademark Examining Attorney | Law Office 107 | 571-270-3118

 

 

 

From: Vaughn Minissian <vaughn@norchemcorp.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 5:57 PM
To: Collopy, Diane <Diane.Collopy@USPTO.GOV>
Subject: MicroKlean serial# 90000987

 

Diane,

 

In light of this rejection, I’d like to discuss our company’s options. This product was launched in partnership with a larger entity as part of our COVID response. Paperwork has been filed with the EPA, and every pesticide department of each state that it is sold in. It’s a disinfectant cleaner on the EPA’s N-List. To change the name would require multiple amendments. This ecolab product MikroKlene looks like it was from 1963. It may not even be on the market anymore. Please let me know what can be done to mitigate this administrative nightmare. We missed ecolab’s product because of it’s extremely unusual spelling. Please, don’t make 2020 any worse than it already is for us.

 

Thank you,

 

VM

 


uspto.report is an independent third-party trademark research tool that is not affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or any other governmental organization. The information provided by uspto.report is based on publicly available data at the time of writing and is intended for informational purposes only.

While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information displayed on this site. The use of this site is at your own risk. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

All official trademark data, including owner information, should be verified by visiting the official USPTO website at www.uspto.gov. This site is not intended to replace professional legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for consulting with a legal professional who is knowledgeable about trademark law.

© 2024 USPTO.report | Privacy Policy | Resources | RSS Feed of Trademarks | Trademark Filings Twitter Feed