United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 90114716
Mark: ADAGIO
|
|
Correspondence Address: 39400 WOODWARD AVENUE, SUITE 101 |
|
Applicant: Adagio Therapeutics, Inc.
|
|
Reference/Docket No. 474234
Correspondence Email Address: |
|
SUSPENSION NOTICE
No Response Required
Issue date: January 28, 2021
A. SUSPENSION
The application is suspended for the reason(s) specified below. See 37 C.F.R. §2.67; TMEP §§716 et seq.
The pending application(s) below has an earlier filing date or effective filing date than applicant’s application. If the mark in the application(s) below registers, the USPTO may refuse registration of applicant’s mark under Section 2(d) because of a likelihood of confusion with the registered mark(s). 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see 37 C.F.R. §2.83; TMEP §1208.02(c). Action on this application is suspended until the prior-filed application(s) below either registers or abandons. 37 C.F.R. §2.83(c). Information relevant to the application(s) below is provided in this letter.
- U.S. Application Serial No(s). 90030535
Suspension process. The USPTO will periodically check this application to determine if it should remain suspended. See TMEP §716.04. As needed, the trademark examining attorney will issue a letter to applicant to inquire about the status of the reason for the suspension. TMEP §716.05.
No response required. Applicant may file a response, but is not required to do so.
It is appreciated that applicant amended the identification of goods in an effort to overcome the refusal and citation. However, the registration and cited application include educational services in the “field of health.” This wording is very broad and presumed to encompass such services featuring information on pharmaceuticals or the use of pharmaceuticals that are identical to applicant’s goods. As noted in the prior Office action, many entities provide medical goods and related services.
In this regard, the trademark examining attorney has attached additional evidence from the USPTO’s X-Search database consisting of a number of third-party marks registered for use in connection with the same or similar goods and/or services as those of both applicant and registrant in this case. This evidence shows that the goods and/or services listed therein, namely, pharmaceutical and related medical/health educational services, are of a kind that may emanate from a single source under a single mark. See In re I-Coat Co., 126 USPQ2d 1730, 1737 (TTAB 2018) (citing In re Infinity Broad. Corp., 60 USPQ2d 1214, 1217-18 (TTAB 2001); In re Albert Trostel & Sons Co., 29 USPQ2d 1783, 1785-86 (TTAB 1993); In re Mucky Duck Mustard Co., 6 USPQ2d 1467, 1470 n.6 (TTAB 1988)); TMEP §1207.01(d)(iii).
Please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned with any questions.
/MaureenDallLott/
Maureen Dall Lott
Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 105
United States Patent and Trademark Office
571-272-9714
maureen.lott@uspto.gov