To: | Akeyless Security Ltd. (docketing@cpaglobal.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90004367 - DISTRIBUTED FRAGMENTS CRYPTOGRAPHY - N03.0002TM00 |
Sent: | September 25, 2020 12:45:10 PM |
Sent As: | ecom107@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 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 90004367
Mark: DISTRIBUTED FRAGMENTS CRYPTOGRAPHY
|
|
Correspondence Address: 900 SECOND AVENUE S., SUITE 600
|
|
Applicant: Akeyless Security Ltd.
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N03.0002TM00
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: September 25, 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.
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.
Section 2(e)(1) Refusal
In this case, the mark wording identifies characteristics or features of the identified software, namely, that it involves encryption and decryption of data via “incomplete or isolated [encryption key] portion[s]” that are “spread or shared [on] several computers rather than one central computer”. (See attached entries from www.ahdictionary.com and www.macmillandictionary.com.) The attached webpage screen capture from makes clear the descriptive nature of the mark wording:
Fragments of a single Encryption Key that are stored in different cloud providers and are NEVER combined … enables us to perform cryptographic operations using fragments of an encryption key, without EVER combining the key fragments. As it is illustrated above, our technology allows us to store fragments of an encryption key in different regions on different cloud providers and never combine those fragments.
Applicant should note the following additional ground for refusal.
Specimen Refusal
In this case, the specimens only reference the applied-for mark as a function or feature of the software, not the actual software itself. (See also attached webpage screen captures from www.akeyless.io, referring to the applied-for mark as a “technology” within its AKEYLESS software, not as the source identifier for the AKEYLESS software platform.)
Examples of specimens. Specimens for services must show a direct association between the mark and the services and include: (1) copies of advertising and marketing material, (2) a photograph of business signage or billboards, or (3) materials showing the mark in the sale, rendering, or advertising of the services. See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(2), (c); TMEP §1301.04(a), (h)(iv)(C).
Any webpage printout or screenshot submitted as a specimen, whether for goods or services, 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 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) (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.
How to respond. Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action.
/Nelson B. Snyder III/
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 107
571-272-9284
nelson.snyder@uspto.gov (Informal comms only
RESPONSE GUIDANCE