Offc Action Outgoing

ST25

I&T ENTERPRISE, INC.

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90009521 - ST25 - N/A

To: I&T ENTERPRISE, INC. (ipdocket@rhemalaw.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90009521 - ST25 - N/A
Sent: March 21, 2022 06:56:49 PM
Sent As: ecom107@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application

 

U.S. Application Serial No. 90009521

 

Mark:  ST25

 

 

 

 

Correspondence Address: 

JOHN D TRAN

1 PARK PLAZA 6TH FLOOR

IRVINE, CA 92782

 

 

 

 

Applicant:  I&T ENTERPRISE, INC.

 

 

 

Reference/Docket No. N/A

 

Correspondence Email Address: 

 ipdocket@rhemalaw.com

 

 

 

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:  March 21, 2022

 

This Office action is in response to Applicant’s communication filed on December 6, 2021.  After reviewing this application, the trademark examining has determined the following:

 

REFUSAL – APPLIED-FOR MARK IS A VARIETAL NAME

Registration is refused because the applied-for mark is a varietal name for the identified goods and, thus, does not function as a trademark to indicate the source of Applicant’s goods and to identify and distinguish them from others.  Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051-1052, 1127; see TMEP §1202.12.  See attached evidence from internet webpages that shows that “ST25” is the varietal name for rice.  Specifically, the trademark examining attorney has attached to the present action evidence showing that “ST25” has been used widely to identify a type of rice.  In fact, discussions of the origin of this wording for rice and its generic significance are widely available, including:

 

·       “Recently, the sign “ST25”, the name of a Vietnamese rice variety, produced a delectable and premium rice product that garnered international recognition and received the “world’s Best Rice” award.”

·       “The rice variety of with the name “ST25”, which was developed and successfully bred by Mr. Ho Quang Cua and his associates, a group of agricultural engineers in Soc Trang province, has produced rice with long grain, no chalkiness, when cooked, the rice is fragrant, sticky and has a very appealing sweet taste, the aroma of pineapple leaves, and the rice retains its fragrance when cooled.”

·       “The initials “ST” stand for “Soc Trang” province, a Mekong Delta province where the “ST25” rice variety is developed and bred.”

·       “ST25 rice is a specialty rice in Soc Trang, popular with consumers.”

·       “ST25 rice belongs to the ST aromatic rice line with many different varieties created and improved by engineer Ho Quang Cua (DNTN Ho Quang Tri, Soc Trang) for over 20 years.  Earlier, ST24 rice also won the first price of the Vietnam delicious rice contest held by the Vietnam Food Association.”

 

See attachments.  When used in this manner, the term “ST25” would immediately press on the ordinary consumer as a varietal name of rice, and Applicant’s first use or evidence of a few people’s opinions that Applicant submitted with its response to the previous Office action would not overcome the perception of the genericness of the term.

 

Varietal or cultivar names are designations used to identify cultivated varieties or subspecies of live plants or agricultural seeds.  TMEP §1202.12.  They are generic and cannot be registered as trademarks because they are the common descriptive names of plants or seeds by which such varieties are known to the U.S. consumer.  Id.  Moreover, a consumer “has to have some common descriptive name he can use to indicate that he wants one [particular] variety of apple tree, rose, or whatever, as opposed to another, and it is the varietal name of the strain which naturally and commonly serves this purpose.”  In re Pennington Seed, Inc., 466 F.3d 1053, 1057, 80 USPQ2d 1758, 1761 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (quoting In re Hilltop Orchards & Nurseries, Inc., 206 USPQ 1034, 1036 (TTAB 1979)); see In re Delta & Pine Land Co., 26 USPQ2d 1157, 1159 n.4 (TTAB 1993).

 

INFORMATION REQUIRED REGARDING APPLIED-FOR MARK

 

To permit proper examination of the applied-for mark, applicant must indicate the following:

 

(1)       Whether “ST25” has ever been used or will be used as a varietal or cultivar name; and

 

(2)       Whether “ST25” has ever been used or will be used in connection with a plant patent, utility patent, or certificate for plant-variety protection. 

 

TMEP §1202.12; see 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b).

 

Failure to comply with a request for information is grounds for refusing registration.  In re Harley, 119 USPQ2d 1755, 1757-58 (TTAB 2016); TMEP §814. 

 

Applicant cannot overcome this refusal by submitting a claim of acquired distinctiveness under Trademark Act Section 2(f).  See 15 U.S.C. §1052(f).  Such a claim would be insufficient because “generic terms cannot be rescued by proof of distinctiveness or secondary meaning no matter how voluminous the proffered evidence may be.”  Royal Crown Co. v. Coca-Cola Co., 892 F.3d 1358, 1370, 127 USPQ2d 1041, 1048 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (quoting In re Northland Aluminum Prods., 777 F.2d 1556, 1558, 227 USPQ2d 961, 962 (Fed. Cir. 1985)); see TMEP §1212.02(i).

 

Although Applicant’s mark has been refused registration, Applicant may respond to the refusal by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.

 

RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION

Please call or email the assigned trademark examining attorney with questions about this Office action.  Although an examining attorney cannot provide legal advice, the examining attorney can provide additional explanation about the refusal(s) and/or requirement(s) in this Office action.  See TMEP §§705.02, 709.06. 

The USPTO does not accept emails as responses to Office actions; however, emails can be used for informal communications and are included in the application record.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(c), 2.191; TMEP §§304.01-.02, 709.04-.05. 

 

How to respond.  Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action.    

 

 

/Dawn Han/

Examining Attorney

Law Office 107

(571) 272-0399

dawn.han@uspto.gov

 

 

 

RESPONSE GUIDANCE

  • Missing the response deadline to this letter will cause the application to abandon.  A response or notice of appeal must be received by the USPTO before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  TEAS and ESTTA maintenance or unforeseen circumstances could affect an applicant’s ability to timely respond.  

 

 

 

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90009521 - ST25 - N/A

To: I&T ENTERPRISE, INC. (ipdocket@rhemalaw.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90009521 - ST25 - N/A
Sent: March 21, 2022 06:56:52 PM
Sent As: ecom107@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on March 21, 2022 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90009521

 

A USPTO examining attorney has reviewed your trademark application and issued an Office action.  You must respond to this Office action in order to avoid your application abandoning.  Follow the steps below.

 

(1)  Read the Office action.  This email is NOT the Office action.

 

(2)  Respond to the Office action by the deadline using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS).  Your response must be received by the USPTO on or before 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  Otherwise, your application will be abandoned.  See the Office action itself regarding how to respond.

 

(3)  Direct general questions about using USPTO electronic forms, the USPTO website, the application process, the status of your application, and whether there are outstanding deadlines to the Trademark Assistance Center (TAC).

 

After reading the Office action, address any question(s) regarding the specific content to the USPTO examining attorney identified in the Office action.

 

 

GENERAL GUIDANCE

·       Check the status of your application periodically in the Trademark Status & Document Retrieval (TSDR) database to avoid missing critical deadlines.

 

·       Update your correspondence email address to ensure you receive important USPTO notices about your application.

 

·       Beware of trademark-related scams.  Protect yourself from people and companies that may try to take financial advantage of you.  Private companies may call you and pretend to be the USPTO or may send you communications that resemble official USPTO documents to trick you.  We will never request your credit card number or social security number over the phone.  And all official USPTO correspondence will only be emailed from the domain “@uspto.gov.”  Verify the correspondence originated from us by using your Serial Number in our database, TSDR, to confirm that it appears under the “Documents” tab, or contact the Trademark Assistance Center.

 

·       Hiring a U.S.-licensed attorney.  If you do not have an attorney and are not required to have one under the trademark rules, we encourage you to hire a U.S.-licensed attorney specializing in trademark law to help guide you through the registration process.  The USPTO examining attorney is not your attorney and cannot give you legal advice, but rather works for and represents the USPTO in trademark matters.

 

 

 


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