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:  December 14, 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.

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES:

• Section 2(d) Refusal – Likelihood of Confusion
• Prior-Filed Applications
• Identification of Goods/Services – Amendment Required
• Fees & Requirements For Adding Additional Class(es)
• Foreign Registration Required

 

SECTION 2(d) REFUSAL – LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION

 

Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the mark in U.S. Registration Nos. 5846501, 4107498, 6190935, 5184217, and 5841574.  Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the attached registration(s).

 

The applied-for mark is DELTA for use in connection with:

 

CLASS 9

Laboratory chemicals solutions, namely, acids used for digestion, atomic absorption standards, ph buffer solutions, calibration standards, concentrates, inductively coupled plasma standards, inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry standards, inorganic standards and solutions, matrix modifiers, organic standards and solutions, quality control standards, proficiency testing standards, reagent chemicals, volumetric solutions and solvents; laboratory consumables, namely, beakers, crucibles, deuterium lamps, electron multipliers, filter papers, graphite tubes, hollow cathode lamps, membrane filters, pipettes, pipette tips, sample introduction glassware, nebulizers and quartz ware, sample cups, sample tubes, sampler and skimmer cones, spectrophotometer cells and syringe filters; laboratory equipment, namely, analytical balances, atomic absorption spectrophotometers, digestion blocks, muffle furnaces, pulverisers and UV-VIS spectrophotometers, namely, supplies in the fields of spectroscopy sciences in the fields of atomic absorption, atomic emission, graphite furnace atomic absorption, inductively coupled plasma, inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry, scanning electron microscopy, UV-VIS spectrometry, X-ray fluorescence and X-ray diffraction; glassware for scientific experiments in laboratories; automatic chromatography apparatus for laboratory use; automatic ion-exchange chromatography apparatus for laboratory use; biological safety cabinets for laboratory use; centrifuges for laboratory use; centrifuges used as laboratory apparatus; chromatography apparatus for laboratory use; chromatography columns for laboratory use; constant humidity incubators for laboratory use; constant temperature incubators for laboratory use; cotton swabs for laboratory use; disposable dispenser syringes for laboratory use; disposable gloves for laboratory use; disposable latex gloves for laboratory use; disposable plastic gloves for laboratory use; distillation columns for laboratory use; drying ovens for laboratory use; electrodes for laboratory research; electronic labels; electronic pipettes for laboratory use; encoded bar code labels; flasks for laboratory use; furnaces for laboratory experiments; furnaces for laboratory use; gas chromatography apparatus for laboratory use; gas mixers for laboratory use; gasifiers for laboratory use; glass driers for laboratory purposes; glass dryers for laboratory use; glassware for laboratory use; glassware for scientific experiments in laboratories; incubators for laboratory use; labels carrying magnetically recorded bar codes; labels with integrated radio frequency identification chips; laboratory baths; laboratory calipers; laboratory centrifuges; laboratory countertops; laboratory eyewash fountains; laboratory flasks; laboratory furniture; laboratory glassware; laboratory incubators; laboratory instrument for the detection of pathogens and toxins in a biological sample for research use; laboratory ovens; laboratory pipettes; laboratory robots; laboratory scales and balances; laboratory slides; laboratory stirrers; laboratory storage tubes; laboratory swabs; laboratory test tubes; laboratory thermometers; laboratory trays; laminar flow cabinets for laboratory use; laminar flow hoods for laboratory use; magnetic agitators for laboratory use; magnetic labels; microwave ovens for laboratory use; ovens for laboratory experiments; ovens for laboratory use; petri dishes for laboratory use; pipeclay triangles for laboratory use; pipette racks for laboratory use; pipette tips for laboratory use; reusable dispenser syringes for laboratory use; special clothing for use in laboratories; sterilizers for laboratory use; stills for laboratory experiments; temperature indicator labels for dishwashers; triangles for laboratory use; vacuum distillation columns for laboratory use; nucleic acid sequencers for scientific purposes; satellites for scientific purposes; scientific apparatus for determining the water content in petroleum products; scientific prisms.

 

CLASS 35      

Distributorship in the field of scientific laboratory products; Advertising the goods of others via electronic media and specifically the Internet; Advertising the goods of others; Providing information online and via social media in relation to scientific laboratory products and advances in scientific research and development generally.

 

CLASS 42      

Product design consulting services; product development services; research and development of new products for others.

 

Already registered are the following marks:

 

DELTA (5846501) for “antioxidant pills; enzyme dietary supplements; enzyme preparations for medical purposes; enzymes for medical purposes; nutritional supplements; vitamin preparations.”

 

DELTA & design (4107498) for “handheld x-ray florescence analyzers for use in the fields of metallurgy, mining, recycling and environmental safety.”

 

DELTA GROUP with “GROUP” disclaimed (6190935) for “digital marketing services for businesses.”

 

DELTA (5184217) for “engineering design services in the field of web converting machines; custom design and engineering of industrial manufacturing and packing machinery.”

 

DELTA (5841574) for “design and development of software in the field of mobile applications for creating, exchanging, securing, managing and tracking finances, fundings, cryptocurency and cryptocurency portfolios; design of web pages for internet; the aforementioned services not in relation to the construction sector and construction industry.”

 

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. 

 

i.                    Similarity of the Marks

 

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).

 

In a likelihood of confusion determination, the marks in their entireties are compared for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression.  In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1323, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2017); 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)); In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 1361, 177 USPQ 563, 567 (C.C.P.A. 1973); TMEP §1207.01(b)-(b)(v). 

 

In the present case, applicant’s mark is DELTA and registrants’ mark is DELTA.  Thus, the word portion of these marks are identical in appearance, sound, and meaning, “and have the potential to be used . . . in exactly the same manner.”  In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 116 USPQ2d 1406, 1411 (TTAB 2015), aff’d, 866 F.3d 1315, 123 USPQ2d 1744 (Fed. Cir. 2017).  Additionally, because they are identical, these marks are likely to engender the same connotation and overall commercial impression when considered in connection with applicant’s and registrant’s respective goods and/or services.  Id.

 

Therefore, the marks are confusingly similar. 

 

With respect to the mark DELTA GROUP (6190935), consumers are generally more inclined to focus on the first word, prefix, or syllable in any trademark or service mark.  See Palm Bay Imps., Inc. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee En 1772, 396 F.3d 1369, 1372, 73 USPQ2d 1689, 1692 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (finding similarity between VEUVE ROYALE and two VEUVE CLICQUOT marks in part because “VEUVE . . . remains a ‘prominent feature’ as the first word in the mark and the first word to appear on the label”); Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v. Century Life of Am., 970 F.2d 874, 876, 23 USPQ2d 1698, 1700 (Fed Cir. 1992) (finding similarity between CENTURY 21 and CENTURY LIFE OF AMERICA in part because “consumers must first notice th[e] identical lead word”); see also In re Detroit Athletic Co., 903 F.3d 1297, 1303, 128 USPQ2d 1047, 1049 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (finding “the identity of the marks’ two initial words is particularly significant because consumers typically notice those words first”).

 

Likewise, when evaluating a composite mark containing both words and designs, the word portion is more likely to indicate the origin of the goods and/or services because it is that portion of the mark that consumers use when referring to or requesting the goods and/or services.  Bond v. Taylor, 119 USPQ2d 1049, 1055 (TTAB 2016) (citing In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908, 1911 (Fed. Cir. 2012)); TMEP §1207.01(c)(ii).  Thus, although marks must be compared in their entireties, the word portion is often considered the dominant feature and is accorded greater weight in determining whether marks are confusingly similar, even where the word portion has been disclaimed.  In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d at 1366-67, 101 USPQ2d at 1911 (citing Giant Food, Inc. v. Nation’s Foodservice, Inc., 710 F.2d 1565, 1570-71, 218 USPQ2d 390, 395 (Fed. Cir. 1983)). 

 

Thus, the marks are considered similar for likelihood of confusion purposes.

 

ii.                  The Goods/Services are Related

 

In a likelihood of confusion determination, the goods and/or services are compared to determine whether they are similar, commercially related, or travel in the same trade channels.  See Coach Servs., Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356, 1369-71, 101 USPQ2d 1713, 1722-23 (Fed. Cir. 2012); Herbko Int’l, Inc. v. Kappa Books, Inc., 308 F.3d 1156, 1165, 64 USPQ2d 1375, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2002); TMEP §§1207.01, 1207.01(a)(vi).

 

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 trademark examining attorney must determine whether there is a likelihood of confusion based on the description of the goods and/or services stated in the application and registration at issue, not on extrinsic evidence of actual use.  See In re Detroit Athletic Co., 903 F.3d 1297, 1307, 128 USPQ2d 1047, 1052 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (citing In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1325, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1749 (Fed. Cir. 2017)). 

 

If the application or cited registration describes the goods and/or services broadly and there are no limitations as to their nature, type, channels of trade or classes of purchasers, it is presumed that the application and registration encompass all goods and/or services of the type described, that they move in all normal channels of trade, and that they are available to all potential customers.  See, e.g., In re Solid State Design Inc., 125 USPQ2d 1409, 1412-15 (TTAB 2018); Sw. Mgmt., Inc. v. Ocinomled, Ltd., 115 USPQ2d 1007, 1025 (TTAB 2015).  In the present case, the applicant’s identification for “laboratory chemicals solutions, namely, acids used for digestion, atomic absorption standards, ph buffer solutions, calibration standards, concentrates, inductively coupled plasma standards, inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry standards, inorganic standards and solutions, matrix modifiers, organic standards and solutions, quality control standards, proficiency testing standards, reagent chemicals, volumetric solutions and solvents” is seen to include registrant’s (DELTA 5846501) “antioxidant pills; enzyme dietary supplements; enzyme preparations for medical purposes; enzymes for medical purposes; nutritional supplements; vitamin preparations.”  Applicant’s “X-ray fluorescence” is also seen to include registrant’s (DELTA 4107498) “handheld x-ray florescence analyzers for use in the fields of metallurgy, mining, recycling and environmental safety.”  Applicant’s “advertising the goods of others via electronic media and specifically the Internet; advertising the goods of others” is seen to include registrant’s (DELTA 6190935) “digital marketing services for businesses.”  Further, applicant’s “product development services” is seen to include registrants’ (DELTA (5184217) & DELTA (5841574)) more narrowly specified design/development services.  Applicant’s “sterilizers for laboratory use” is seen to include registrants’ “water treatment equipment, namely, ultraviolet sterilization units” (3058944, 3732580) and “baby bottle sterilizers” (3058944, 5911933, 5911934) Thus, applicant’s and registrant(s)’ goods/services are legally identical.  See, e.g., In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 127 USPQ2d 1627, 1629 (TTAB 2018) (citing Tuxedo Monopoly, Inc. v. Gen. Mills Fun Grp., Inc., 648 F.2d 1335, 1336, 209 USPQ 986, 988 (C.C.P.A. 1981); Inter IKEA Sys. B.V. v. Akea, LLC, 110 USPQ2d 1734, 1745 (TTAB 2014); Baseball Am. Inc. v. Powerplay Sports Ltd., 71 USPQ2d 1844, 1847 n.9 (TTAB 2004)).    

 

Additionally, the goods and/or services of the parties have no restrictions as to nature, type, channels of trade, or classes of purchasers and are “presumed to travel in the same channels of trade to the same class of purchasers.”  In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Packard Press, Inc., 281 F.3d 1261, 1268, 62 USPQ2d 1001, 1005 (Fed. Cir. 2002)).  Thus, applicant’s and registrant(s)’ goods and/or services are related.

 

In conclusion, upon encountering applicant’s and registrant(s)’s marks used on the identified goods and/or services, consumers are likely to be confused and mistakenly believe that the respective goods and/or services emanate from a common source.  Accordingly, registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the mark in U.S. Registration No(s). 5846501, 4107498, 6190935, 5184217, and 5841574. Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.

 

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

 

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

 

PRIOR-FILED APPLICATIONS

 

The effective filing dates of pending U.S. Application Serial Nos. 87959499 and 88534040 precede applicant’s filing date.  See attached referenced applications.  If one or more of the marks in the referenced applications register, applicant’s mark may be refused registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d) because of a likelihood of confusion with the registered mark(s).  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 applications.

 

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 marks in the referenced applications.  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/SERVICES – AMENDMENT REQUIRED

 

The identification of goods/services is indefinite and must be clarified to further specify the nature, use, or subject matter of certain items, as set out in bold below.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01. 

 

Applicant has classified “Laboratory chemicals solutions, namely, acids used for digestion, atomic absorption standards, ph buffer solutions, calibration standards, concentrates, inductively coupled plasma standards, inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry standards, inorganic standards and solutions, matrix modifiers, organic standards and solutions, quality control standards, proficiency testing standards, reagent chemicals, volumetric solutions and solvents” in International Class 9; however, the proper classification is International Class 1.  Therefore, applicant may respond by (1) adding International Class 1 to the application and reclassifying these goods and/or services in the proper international class, (2) deleting “Laboratory chemicals solutions, namely, acids used for digestion, atomic absorption standards, ph buffer solutions, calibration standards, concentrates, inductively coupled plasma standards, inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry standards, inorganic standards and solutions, matrix modifiers, organic standards and solutions, quality control standards, proficiency testing standards, reagent chemicals, volumetric solutions and solvents” from the application, or (3) deleting the remainder of the items in the identification and reclassifying the specified goods and/or services in the proper international class.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.86(a), 6.1; TMEP §§1403.02 et seq.  If applicant adds one or more international classes to the application, applicant must comply with the multiple-class requirements specified in this Office action.

 

Generally, a trademark examining attorney will recommend acceptable substitute wording for unacceptable identifications of goods and/or services.  In this case, however, because the nature of “atomic absorption standards…calibration standards, concentrates, inductively coupled plasma standards, inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry standards, inorganic standards and solutions, matrix modifiers, organic standards and solutions, quality control standards, proficiency testing standards,…volumetric solutions” is unclear from the application record, the trademark examining attorney is unable to suggest any alternative wording.  See TMEP §1402.01(e).

 

Applicant may adopt the following identification, if accurate (changes shown in bold):

 

CLASS 1       

 

Laboratory chemicals solutions, namely, acids being enzymes to assist in digestion for use in manufacture of animal feeds, atomic absorption standards, ph buffer solutions used in analytical chemicstry, calibration standards, concentrates, inductively coupled plasma standards, inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry standards, inorganic standards and solutions, matrix modifiers, organic standards and solutions, quality control standards, proficiency testing standards, reagent chemicals for non-medical purposes, volumetric solutions and solvents for varnishes. [reclassified from Class 9]

 

CLASS 9

 

Laboratory chemicals solutions, namely, acids used for digestion, atomic absorption standards, ph buffer solutions, calibration standards, concentrates, inductively coupled plasma standards, inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry standards, inorganic standards and solutions, matrix modifiers, organic standards and solutions, quality control standards, proficiency testing standards, reagent chemicals, volumetric solutions and solvents; laboratory consumables, namely, beakers, crucibles, deuterium lamps, electron multipliers, filter papers, graphite tubes, hollow cathode lamps, membrane filters, pipettes, pipette tips, sample introduction glassware, nebulizers for scientific use and quartz ware being quartz lamps for scientific use, specimen cups for scientific use, sample test tubes, sampler and skimmer cones, spectrophotometer cells and syringe filters; laboratory equipment, namely, analytical balances, atomic absorption spectrophotometers, digestion blocks, muffle furnaces, pulverisers; UV-VIS spectrophotometers, namely, supplies in the nature of {indicate specific supplies, e.g.,            spectrograph apparatus, etc.} for use in the fields of spectroscopy sciences in the fields of atomic absorption, atomic emission, graphite furnace atomic absorption, inductively coupled plasma, inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry, scanning electron microscopy, UV-VIS spectrometry, X-ray fluorescence and X-ray diffraction; glassware for scientific experiments in laboratories; automatic chromatography apparatus for laboratory use; automatic ion-exchange chromatography apparatus for laboratory use; biological safety cabinets for laboratory use; centrifuges for laboratory use; centrifuges used as laboratory apparatus; chromatography apparatus for laboratory use; chromatography columns for laboratory use; constant humidity incubators for laboratory use; constant temperature incubators for laboratory use; cotton swabs for laboratory use; disposable dispenser syringes for laboratory use; disposable gloves for laboratory use; disposable latex gloves for laboratory use; disposable plastic gloves for laboratory use; distillation columns for laboratory use; drying ovens for laboratory use; electrodes for laboratory research; electronic radio frequency identification (RFID) labels; electronic pipettes for laboratory use; encoded bar code labels; flasks for laboratory use; furnaces for laboratory experiments; furnaces for laboratory use; gas chromatography apparatus for laboratory use; gas mixers for laboratory use; gasifiers for laboratory use; glass driers for laboratory purposes; glass dryers for laboratory use; glassware for laboratory use; glassware for scientific experiments in laboratories [duplicate]; incubators for laboratory use; labels carrying magnetically recorded bar codes; labels with integrated radio frequency identification chips; laboratory baths heaters; laboratory calipers; laboratory centrifuges; laboratory countertops; laboratory eyewash fountains; laboratory flasks; laboratory furniture; laboratory glassware; laboratory incubators; laboratory instrument for the detection of pathogens and toxins in a biological sample for research use; laboratory ovens; laboratory pipettes; laboratory robots; laboratory scales and balances; laboratory glassware, namely, laboratory slides; laboratory glassware, namely, laboratory stirrers; laboratory storage tubes; laboratory swabs; laboratory test tubes; laboratory thermometers; laboratory trays; laminar flow cabinets for laboratory use; laminar flow hoods for laboratory use; magnetic agitators for laboratory use; encoded magnetic labels; microwave ovens for laboratory use; ovens for laboratory experiments; ovens for laboratory use; petri dishes for laboratory use; pipeclay triangles for laboratory use; pipette racks for laboratory use; pipette tips for laboratory use; reusable dispenser syringes for laboratory use; protective clothing especially made for use in laboratories; sterilizers for laboratory use [reclassified ; stills for laboratory experiments; temperature indicator labels for dishwashers, not for medical purposes; pipeclay triangles for laboratory use; vacuum distillation columns for laboratory use; nucleic acid sequencers for scientific purposes; satellites for scientific purposes; scientific apparatus for determining the water content in petroleum products; prisms for scientific purposes.

 

CLASS 11

 

Sterilizers for laboratory use [reclassified from Class 9].

 

CLASS 35      

 

Distributorship in the field of scientific laboratory products; Advertising the goods of others via electronic media and specifically the Internet; Advertising the goods of others; Providing consumer product information online and via online social media in relation to scientific laboratory products and advances in scientific research and development generally.

 

CLASS 42      

 

New product design consulting services; product development services; research and development of new products for others.

 

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.

 

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

 

FEES & REQUIREMENTS FOR ADDING ADDITIONAL CLASS(ES)

 

The application identifies goods and/or services in more than one international class; therefore, applicant must satisfy all the requirements below for each international class based on Trademark Act Sections 1(b) and 44:

 

(1)        List the goods and/or 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 fee(s) already paid (view the USPTO’s current fee schedule).  The application identifies goods and/or services that are classified in at least 5 classes; however, applicant submitted a fee(s) sufficient for only 3 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 Sections 1(b) and 44 multiple-class application and how to satisfy the requirements online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Multiple-class Application webpage.

 

FOREIGN REGISTRATION REQUIRED

 

The application specifies both an intent to use basis under Trademark Act Section 1(b) and a claim of priority under Section 44(d) based on a foreign application.  See 15 U.S.C. §§1051(b), 1126(d); 37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(2), (a)(4).  However, no copy of a foreign registration has been provided even though the application indicates applicant’s intent to rely on Section 44(e) as an additional basis for registration.  See 15 U.S.C. §1126(e).

 

An application with a Section 44(e) basis must include a true copy, photocopy, certification, or certified copy of a foreign registration from an applicant’s country of origin.  15 U.S.C. §1126(e); 37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(3)(ii); TMEP §§1004, 1004.01, 1016.  In addition, an applicant’s country of origin must be a party to a convention or treaty relating to trademarks to which the United States is also a party, or must extend reciprocal registration rights to nationals of the United States by law.  15 U.S.C. §1126(b); TMEP §§1002.01, 1004.

 

Therefore, applicant must provide a copy of the foreign registration from applicant’s country of origin when it becomes available.  TMEP §1003.04(a).  A copy of a foreign registration must consist of a document issued to an applicant by, or certified by, the intellectual property office in applicant’s country of origin.  TMEP §1004.01.  If applicant’s country of origin does not issue registrations or Madrid Protocol certificates of extension of protection, applicant may submit a copy of the Madrid Protocol international registration that shows that protection of the international registration has been extended to applicant’s country of origin.  TMEP §1016.  In addition, applicant must also provide an English translation if the foreign registration is not written in English.  37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(3)(ii); TMEP §1004.01(a)-(b).  The translation should be signed by the translator.  TMEP §1004.01(b).

 

If the foreign registration has not yet issued, or applicant requires additional time to procure a copy of the foreign registration (and English translation, as appropriate), applicant should so inform the trademark examining attorney and request that the U.S. application be suspended until a copy of the foreign registration is available.  TMEP §§716.02(b), 1003.04(b).

 

If applicant cannot satisfy the requirements of a Section 44(e) basis, applicant may request that the mark be approved for publication based solely on the Section 1(b) basis.  See 15 U.S.C. §§1051(b), 1126(e); 37 C.F.R. §2.35(b)(1); TMEP §§806.02(f), 806.04(b), 1003.04(b).  Although the mark may be approved for publication on the Section 1(b) basis, it will not register until an acceptable allegation of use has been filed.  See 15 U.S.C. §1051(c)-(d); 37 C.F.R. §§2.76, 2.88; TMEP §1103.  Please note that, if the U.S. application satisfied the requirements of Section 44(d) as of the U.S. application filing date, applicant may retain the priority filing date under Section 44(d) without perfecting the Section 44(e) basis, provided there is a continuing valid basis for registration.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.35(b)(3)-(4); TMEP §§806.02(f), 806.04(b). 

 

Alternatively, applicant has the option to amend the application to rely solely on the Section 44(e) basis and request deletion of the Section 1(b) basis.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.35(b)(1); TMEP §806.04.  The foreign registration alone may serve as the basis for obtaining a U.S. registration.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(3); TMEP §806.01(d).

 

Assistance.   Please 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.    

 

 

/Julie Vo/

Julie Vo

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 123

(571) 272-4880

julie.vo@uspto.gov (preferred)

 

 

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 December 14, 2020 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90103980

 

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. 

 

 

/Julie Vo/

Julie Vo

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 123

(571) 272-4880

julie.vo@uspto.gov (preferred)

 

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 December 14, 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.”