Offc Action Outgoing

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

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

 

 

 

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:  November 30, 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.

 

SECTION 2(d) REFUSAL – LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION

 

Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the marks in U.S. Registration Nos. 4750791;4237864; 4237848; 3046954 and 2303666.  Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the attached registrations.

 

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).  Any evidence of record related to those factors need be considered; however, “not all of the DuPont factors are relevant or of similar weight in every case.”  In re Guild Mortg. Co., 912 F.3d 1376, 1379, 129 USPQ2d 1160, 1162 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (quoting In re Dixie Rests., Inc., 105 F.3d 1405, 1406, 41 USPQ2d 1531, 1533 (Fed. Cir. 1997)).

 

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. 

 

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)), aff’d per curiam, 777 F. App’x 516, 2019 BL 343921 (Fed. Cir. 2019); TMEP §1207.01(b).

 

The word portions of the marks are identical in appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression; therefore, the addition of a design element does not obviate the similarity of the marks in this case.  See In re Shell Oil Co., 992 F.2d 1204, 1206, 26 USPQ2d 1687, 1688 (Fed. Cir. 1993); TMEP §1207.01(c)(ii).

 

The goods and services of the cited marks are identical or closely related to the applicant’s goods and services.  As such, there is a great likelihood of confusion as to source.

 

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).

 

The overriding concern is not only to prevent buyer confusion as to the source of the goods and/or services, but to protect the registrant from adverse commercial impact due to use of a similar mark by a newcomer.  See In re Shell Oil Co., 992 F.2d 1204, 1208, 26 USPQ2d 1687, 1690 (Fed. Cir. 1993).  Therefore, any doubt regarding a likelihood of confusion determination is resolved in favor of the registrant.  TMEP §1207.01(d)(i); see Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Packard Press, Inc., 281 F.3d 1261, 1265, 62 USPQ2d 1001, 1003 (Fed. Cir. 2002); In re Hyper Shoppes (Ohio), Inc., 837 F.2d 463, 464-65, 6 USPQ2d 1025, 1026 (Fed. Cir. 1988).

 

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

 

If applicant responds to the refusal, applicant must also respond to the requirement(s) set forth below.

 

PRIOR-FILED APPLICATION

 

The filing date of pending U.S. Application Serial No. 88140316 precedes applicant’s filing date.  See attached referenced application.  If the mark in the referenced application registers, applicant’s mark may be refused registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d) because of a likelihood of confusion between the two marks.  See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); 37 C.F.R. §2.83; TMEP §§1208 et seq.  Therefore, upon receipt of applicant’s response to this Office action, action on this application may be suspended pending final disposition of the earlier-filed referenced application.

 

In response to this Office action, applicant may present arguments in support of registration by addressing the issue of the potential conflict between applicant’s mark and the mark in the referenced application.  Applicant’s election not to submit arguments at this time in no way limits applicant’s right to address this issue later if a refusal under Section 2(d) issues.

 

IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS AND SERVICES

 

The identification for software in International Class 9 is indefinite and too broad and must be clarified to specify (1) the purpose or function of the software and its content or field of use, if content- or field- specific; and (2) whether its format is downloadable, recorded, or online non-downloadable.  “Electronic publications” must also specify whether downloadable or recorded on computer media.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.03(d), 1402.11(a).  Downloadable and recorded goods are in International Class 9, whereas providing their temporary, online non-downloadable use is a service in International Class 42.  See TMEP §1402.03(d).   

 

The USPTO requires such specificity 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).

 

The identification of goods and services is indefinite and must be clarified because it is unclear and confusingly duplicative.  “Style” is overly broad, and seems to be covered by “fashion” and “lifestyle.”  Magazines are a type of periodical.  “Advertisements” are generally not goods in trade.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01.  Applicant may adopt the following identification, if accurate: 

 

“Audio books, downloadable books, books, magazines and newspapers, and electronic books, magazines and newspapers recorded on computer media in the fields of news, lifestyle, fashion, beauty and luxury products; downloadable mobile applications for providing access to online news articles regarding lifestyle, fashion, beauty and luxury products; downloadable podcasts in the fields of news, lifestyle, fashion, beauty and luxury products; downloadable augmented and virtual reality software for playing computer games; downloadable computer game software; sunglasses; frames for eyeglasses and pince-nez; eyeglasses,” in class 9;

 

“Newspapers; comics; printed leaflets, journals, periodicals, books and flyers in the fields of news, lifestyle, fashion, beauty and luxury products; book plates; printed advertising boards of cardboard and paper,” in class 16;

 

“Advertising, marketing and promotional services for publications concerning fashion and beauty and purveyors of clothing fashions and beauty products; publication of publicity materials in the fields of fashion and beauty, and publications concerning fashion and beauty; advertising services for the promotion of e-commerce in the fashion, beauty and publishing fields; business administration of consumer loyalty programs in the fields of clothing fashion and beauty; customer loyalty and customer club services for commercial, promotional and/or advertising purposes in the field of clothing and fashion accessories; newspaper subscriptions and subscriptions to electronic journals in the fields of fashion and beauty; provision of consumer information and advice regarding the selection of fashion products and services to be purchased; electronic commerce services, namely, providing information about clothing, fashion and beauty products via telecommunication networks for advertising and sales purposes; publicity and sales promotion services relating to goods and services in the fields of fashion and beauty,” in class 35;

 

“Providing on-line chat rooms and electronic bulletin boards for transmission of messages among computer users concerning news, lifestyle, fashion, beauty and luxury products; chatroom services for social networking; transmission of podcasts,” in class 38;

 

“On-line journals, namely, blogs featuring news, style, lifestyle, fashion and luxury products; providing a website featuring blogs and non-downloadable publications in the nature of articles in the fields of news, lifestyle, fashion, beauty and luxury products; entertainment services, namely, providing webcasts in the fields of fashion, beauty and lifestyle; entertainment services, namely, providing a web site featuring photographic, video and prose presentations featuring fashion, beauty and lifestyle; providing a website featuring entertainment information concerning luxury lifestyles; providing a website featuring entertainment information in the fields of fashion, beauty and luxury lifestyles; providing an Internet website portal in the field of entertainment, cultural and sporting events; providing online non-downloadable electronic publications in the nature of books, magazines and newspapers in the fields of news, lifestyle, fashion and luxury products; publishing of web magazines in the fields of news, lifestyle, fashion, beauty and luxury products; online electronic publishing and publication of books and periodicals in the fields of news, lifestyle, fashion and luxury products; multimedia publishing services; on-line library services, namely, providing electronic library services which feature newspapers, magazines, photographs and pictures via an on-line computer network; entertainment services, namely, providing video podcasts in the fields of news, lifestyle, fashion, beauty and luxury products; entertainment services, namely, providing virtual environments in which users can interact for recreational, leisure or entertainment purposes; augmented reality video production; providing online augmented reality games; entertainment in the nature of fashion shows; fashion modeling for entertainment purposes; video production services; television show production; provision of information relating to live entertainment; entertainment services in the nature of live visual and audio performances, namely, musical, variety, news and comedy shows; organization of fashion shows for entertainment purposes,” in class 41;

 

“Providing a website featuring information about beauty and lifestyle wellness,” in class 44.

 

“Providing a website featuring fashion information and the fashionista lifestyle,” in class 45.

 

Applicant must rewrite the identification of goods and services in its entirety because of the nature and extent of the amendment.  37 C.F.R. §2.74(a).

 

Applicant may amend the identification to clarify or limit the goods and services, but not to broaden or expand the goods and services beyond those in the original application.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06.  Generally, any deleted goods or services may not later be reinserted.  See TMEP §1402.07(e).

 

ONLINE ID MANUAL

 

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.

 

MULTIPLE-CLASS APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS

 

The application identifies goods and services in more than one international class; therefore, applicant must satisfy all the requirements below for each international class based on Trademark Act Section 1(b):

 

(1)        List the goods and services by their international class number in consecutive numerical order, starting with the lowest numbered class.

 

(2)        Submit a filing fee for each international class not covered by the fees already paid (view the USPTO’s current fee schedule).  The application identifies goods and services that are classified in at least seven classes; however, applicant submitted fees sufficient for only five classes.  Applicant must either submit the filing fees for the classes not covered by the submitted fees or restrict the application to the number of classes covered by the fees already paid.

 

See 37 C.F.R. §2.86(a); TMEP §§1403.01, 1403.02(c).

 

For an overview of the requirements for a Section 1(b) multiple-class application and how to satisfy the requirements online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Multiple-class Application webpage.

 

WHO CAN SIGN FOR APPLICANT

 

A verified statement, which includes statements supported by a signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20, must be signed by the applicant or a person “properly authorized to verify facts” and sign on behalf of the applicant.  37 C.F.R. §2.193(e)(1); TMEP §804.04; see 37 C.F.R. §2.33(a).  The following persons are properly authorized:  (1) a person with legal authority to bind a juristic applicant (e.g., a corporate officer of a corporate applicant or a general partner of a partnership applicant); (2) a person with firsthand knowledge of the facts and actual or implied authority to act on behalf of applicant; and (3) an attorney who is authorized to represent the applicant and to practice before the USPTO.  37 C.F.R. §2.193(e)(1); TMEP §804.04. 

 

“Attorney in fact” would not be considered a proper signatory to a response to this Office action.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.17(a), 2.62(b).  The USPTO cannot accept a response signed by an improper party.

Who can sign the response.

Applicant has an attorney.  The attorney must sign the response.  37 C.F.R. §2.193(e)(2)(i); TMEP §712.01.  The only attorneys who may sign responses are (1) attorneys in good standing with a bar of the highest court of any U.S. state or territory, and (2) Canadian trademark attorneys or agents reciprocally recognized by the USPTO’s Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) who are working under a qualified U.S.-licensed attorney.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.17(a), 11.14(a), (c), (e); TMEP §602.

 

The USPTO must receive a properly signed response before the deadline or the USPTO will consider the application abandoned.  37 C.F.R. §2.65(a); TMEP §718.03.  In such case, applicant may file a new application with a new fee.  A petition to the Director to reverse the holding of abandonment may be granted in very limited circumstances as outlined in TMEP §1713.01.

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

/Ira Goodsaid/

Ira Goodsaid

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 101

571-272-9166

ira.goodsaid@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.  

 

• Responses signed by an unauthorized party are not accepted and can cause the application to abandon.  If applicant does not have an attorney, the response must be signed by the individual applicant, all joint applicants, or someone with legal authority to bind a juristic applicant.  If applicant has an attorney, the response must be signed by the attorney.

 

• If needed, find contact information for the supervisor of the office or unit listed in the signature block.

 

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on November 30, 2020 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90094846

 

Your trademark application has been reviewed by a trademark examining attorney.  As part of that review, the assigned attorney has issued an official letter that you must respond to by the specified deadline or your application will be abandoned.  Please follow the steps below.

 

(1)  Read the official letter.

 

(2)  Direct questions about the contents of the Office action to the assigned attorney below. 

 

 

/Ira Goodsaid/

Ira Goodsaid

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 101

571-272-9166

ira.goodsaid@uspto.gov

 

 

Direct questions about navigating USPTO electronic forms, the USPTO website, the application process, the status of your application, and/or whether there are outstanding deadlines or documents related to your file to the Trademark Assistance Center (TAC).

 

(3)  Respond within 6 months (or earlier, if required in the Office action) from November 30, 2020, using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS).  The response must be received by the USPTO before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  See the Office action for more information about how to respond

 

 

 

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, if needed, to ensure you receive important USPTO notices about your application.

 

·         Beware of misleading notices sent by private companies about your application.  Private companies not associated with the USPTO use public information available in trademark registrations to mail and email trademark-related offers and notices – most of which require fees.  All official USPTO correspondence will only be emailed from the domain “@uspto.gov.”