Offc Action Outgoing

LL LAY LAW, P.C.

Lay Law, P.C.

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90186038 - LL LAY LAW, P.C. - N/A

To: Lay Law, P.C. (clifford@laylaw.net)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90186038 - LL LAY LAW, P.C. - N/A
Sent: January 28, 2021 03:27:31 PM
Sent As: ecom108@uspto.gov
Attachments: Attachment - 1
Attachment - 2
Attachment - 3

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

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

 

U.S. Application Serial No. 90186038

 

Mark:  LL LAY LAW, P.C.

 

 

 

 

Correspondence Address: 

LAY LAW, P.C.

1115 BROADWAY, 10TH FL

NEW YORK CITY, NY 10010

 

 

 

 

Applicant:  Lay Law, P.C.

 

 

 

Reference/Docket No. N/A

 

Correspondence Email Address: 

 clifford@laylaw.net

 

 

 

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:  January 28, 2021

 

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:

 

  • Specimen Refusal
  • Information Request
  • Mark Drawing and Description
  • TEAS Plus Status Lost – Processing Fee Required

 

SEARCH OF USPTO DATABASE OF MARKS

 

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.

 

SPECIMEN

 

Mere Drawing

 

Specimen is merely a drawing or depiction of the mark.  Registration is refused because the specimen is merely a photocopy of the drawing or a depiction of the applied-for mark and does not show the applied-for mark as actually used in commerce with the services in International Class(es) 45.  Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a), (c); In re Chica, 84 USPQ2d 1845, 1848 (TTAB 2007); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a), 1301.04(g)(i).  An application based on Trademark Act Section 1(a) must include a specimen showing the applied-for mark as actually used in commerce for each international class of or services identified in the application or amendment to allege use.  15 U.S.C. §1051(a)(1); 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a). 

 

Digital

 

Digitally created or altered image or mockup is not an acceptable specimen.  Registration is also refused because the specimen appears to consist of a digitally created or altered image or a mockup of a depiction of the mark on business card and does not show the applied-for mark as actually used in commerce in International Class(es) 45.  Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a), (c); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a), 1301.04(a), (g)(i). 

 

An application based on Trademark Act Section 1(a) must include a specimen showing the applied-for mark as actually used in commerce for each international class of services identified in the application or amendment to allege use.  15 U.S.C. §1051(a)(1); 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a); TMEP §§904, 904.07(a); 1301.01 et seq.  “Use in commerce” means (1) a bona fide use of the applied-for mark in the ordinary course of trade (and not merely to reserve a right in the mark), (2) the mark is used in the sale, advertising, or rendering of the services, and (3) the services are actually rendered in commerce.  See 15 U.S.C. §1127. 

 

An image of business signage, such as on a storefront or delivery van, or a webpage that has been digitally created or altered to include the mark, or a mockup of how the mark may be displayed, is not a proper specimen for services because it does not show actual use of the mark in commerce.  Similarly, a website showing the mark for the services that applicant is not currently engaged in selling, advertising, or rendering is not a proper specimen.  See 15 U.S.C. §1127; 37 C.F.R. §2.56(c); TMEP §§904.07(a), 1301.04(g)(i).

 

In this case, the specimen consists of a digitally altered image because the business card is not an actual hard copy image of a business card.  Instead, the business card appears to be a computer-generated rendering of applicant’s applied-for mark.  Indeed, the card is identical to the mark drawing of applicant’s applied-for mark.  In addition, there is no information on the specimen identifying the services listed in the application.  Therefore the specimen does not show actual use of the mark in commerce.

 

Response options.  Applicant may respond to the specimen refusal by satisfying one of the following options 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 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.  For instructions on how to submit a different specimen using the online Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Specimen webpage.

 

(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.

 

If applicant submits an acceptable verified substitute specimen or amends to Section 1(b), the requirement below for additional information/documentation about the original specimen will be withdrawn.  The requirement below as to the original specimen will be made final if applicant submits a substitute specimen that is not acceptable or does not amend to Section 1(b), and does not also respond completely to the requirement below.

 

Additional information/documentation about original specimen(s) required.  To permit proper examination of the application record for compliance with use in commerce requirements, applicant must respond to the following requests for information and documentation about the specimen(s).  See 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b); TMEP §814.  A specimen must show the mark as actually used in commerce, which means use in the ordinary course of trade, and not merely to reserve a right in the trademark.  15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1052, 1127.  Because the specimen of record appears to be digitally created or altered, or is a mockup, further information is necessary to determine whether the specimen is in actual use in commerce. 

 

Answer for each specimen/photograph/image previously provided.  For any website source, provide a digital copy of the entire webpage from top to bottom, as rendered in an Internet browser, that includes the URL and access or print date.  TMEP §710.01(b) (citing In re I-Coat Co., 126 USPQ2d 1730, 1733 (TTAB 2018)). 

 

(1)       Identify the particular service(s) listed in the application for which the specimen(s) was submitted to show use of the mark.

 

(2)       Explain whether the specimen was created for submission with this application.  If so, specify the date each specimen was created.  If applicant obtained the content of the webpage or image(s) of the mark in connection with the services shown in the specimen(s) from a third-party website, provide the URL of the website and a digital copy of relevant webpage(s) for each image.

 

(3)       Provide information about how applicant advertises the services and representative examples from online or print sources showing how the mark appears in applicant’s advertising of the services.  Provide the name of the online or print source and a complete copy of the webpage(s) or print page(s) showing the services advertised for sale.  For each source, specify when the services were first advertised for sale and if the services are still advertised for sale in that environment.

 

(4)       For the services identified in response to question (1), specify the date the services were first rendered or provided to or within the United States, and provide documentation that shows payment or other consideration made for the services, redacting personal or private information of buyers as necessary.

 

Failure to comply with a requirement to furnish information is grounds for refusing registration.  In re Harley, 119 USPQ2d 1755, 1757-58 (TTAB 2016); TMEP §814.  Merely stating that information is available on applicant’s or a third party website or providing a hyperlink of such a website is an insufficient response and will not make the additional information or materials of record.  See In re Planalytics, Inc., 70 USPQ2d 1453, 1457-58 (TTAB 2004).

 

Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal(s) by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.  However, if applicant responds to the refusal(s), applicant must also respond to the requirement(s) set forth below.

 

DESCRIPTION OF MARK REQUIRED

 

Applicant must submit an amended description of the mark because the current one is incomplete and does not describe all the significant aspects of the mark.  37 C.F.R. §2.37; see TMEP §§808.01, 808.02.  Descriptions must be accurate and identify all the literal and design elements in the mark.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.37; TMEP §§808 et seq. 

 

In addition, applicant must clarify whether color is a feature of the mark because, although the drawing shows the mark in color, the application does not state whether color is a feature of the mark.  37 C.F.R. §§2.37, 2.52(b)(1), 2.61(b); see TMEP §807.07(a)-(a)(ii).

 

Applicant may respond to this requirement by satisfying one of the following:

 

(1)       If color is not a feature of the mark, applicant must submit a black-and-white drawing of the mark to replace the color drawing.  See TMEP §807.07(a)(i).  However, any other amendments to the drawing will not be accepted if they materially alter the mark.  37 C.F.R. §2.72; see TMEP §§807.14 et seq.  Applicant must also submit a revised description of all literal and design elements in the mark, deleting any reference to color, if appropriate.  37 C.F.R. §2.37; see TMEP §§808.01, 808.02.  The following description is suggested, if accurate:  The mark consists of a rectangular border inside of which is the stylized letters “LL”, with the first letter “L” displayed upside down.  Below the letters is the wording “LAY LAW, P.C.”. 

 

(2)       If color is a feature of the mark, applicant must submit a statement (a) listing all the colors that are claimed as a feature of the mark and (b) describing all the literal and design elements in the mark that specifies where each color appears in those elements.  37 C.F.R. §§2.37, 2.52(b)(1); TMEP §807.07(a)-(a)(ii).  Generic color names must be used to describe the colors in the mark, e.g., red, yellow, blue.  TMEP §807.07(a)(i)-(ii).  If black, white, and/or gray represent background, outlining, shading, and/or transparent areas and are not part of the mark, applicant must so specify in the description.  See TMEP §807.07(d).  The following color claim and description are suggested, if accurate: 

 

Color claim:  The colors blue, black, and white are claimed as a feature of the mark.

 

Description:  The mark consists of a black rectangular border inside of which is the stylized blue letters “LL”, with the first letter “L” displayed upside down.  Below the letters is the black wording “LAY LAW, P.C.”.  All of the foregoing is against a white background that is claimed as a feature of the mark. 

 

See TMEP §807.07(b).

 

DISCLAIMER REQUIRED

 

Applicant must disclaim the wording “LAW, P.C.” in the mark because it is merely descriptive of an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose, or use of applicant’s services.  See 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd., 695 F.3d 1247, 1251, 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1755 (Fed. Cir. 2012); TMEP §§1213, 1213.03(a). 

 

Applicant’s services are “Legal services, namely, providing customized documentation, information, counseling, advice and consultation services in all areas of real estate law.”   Thus, the wording “LAW”, which appears in applicant’s identification, is merely generic for applicant’s law services. 

 

In addition, applicant must disclaim the abbreviation “P.C.” because it merely designates the legal character or family business structure of an entity and does not indicate the source of applicant’s services.  See 15 U.S.C. §§1051-1053, 1127; In re Piano Factory Grp., Inc., 85 USPQ2d 1522, 1526 (TTAB 2006); In re Patent & Trademark Servs., Inc., 49 USPQ2d 1537, 1539-40 (TTAB 1998); TMEP §1213.03(d).

 

Business type designations and abbreviations such as “Corporation,” “Inc.,” “Company,” “LLC,” and “Ltd.” or family business designations such as “& Sons” or “Bros.” must be disclaimed, because they merely indicate applicant’s business type or structure and generally have no source-indicating capacity.  TMEP §1213.03(d); see, e.g., Goodyear’s India Rubber Glove Mfg. Co. v. Goodyear Rubber Co., 128 U.S. 598, 602-03 (1888); In re Piano Factory Grp., Inc., 85 USPQ2d at 1526; In re Patent & Trademark Servs., Inc., 49 USPQ2d at 1539-40. 

 

Here, the wording “P.C.” is merely “the abbreviation for professional corporation, which is a special corporation established by professionals, such as physicians, accountants, or, in some states, attorneys, who practice together.”  See the attached dictionary evidence.

 

Applicant may respond to this issue by submitting a disclaimer in the following format: 

 

No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “LAW, P.C.” apart from the mark as shown. 

 

For an overview of disclaimers and instructions on how to provide one using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), see the Disclaimer webpage. 

 

Processing Fee Required – Considered TEAS Standard Application

 

Processing fee required.  Applicant must submit an additional processing fee of $100 per class because the application as originally filed did not meet the TEAS Plus application filing requirements.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.22(c); TMEP §§819.01-.01(q), 819.04.  Specifically, applicant failed to meet the following requirement(s):  a color claim and description of where the colors appear in the mark was not provided, although the drawing shows the mark in color.

 

 The additional processing fee is required regardless of whether applicant satisfies these application requirements.

 

Accordingly, the application will no longer be treated as TEAS Plus; it is now considered a TEAS Standard application.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.22(c); TMEP §819.04.

 

RESPONSE GUIDELINES

 

Because of the legal technicalities and strict deadlines of the trademark application process, applicant is encouraged to hire a private attorney who specializes in trademark matters to assist in this process.  The assigned trademark examining attorney can provide only limited assistance explaining the content of an Office action and the application process.  USPTO staff cannot provide legal advice or statements about an applicant’s legal rights.  TMEP §§705.02, 709.06.  See Hiring a U.S.-licensed trademark attorney for more information. 

 

Response guidelines.  For this application to proceed, applicant must explicitly address each refusal and/or requirement in this Office action.  For a refusal, applicant may provide written arguments and evidence against the refusal, and may have other response options if specified above.  For a requirement, applicant should set forth the changes or statements.  Please see “Responding to Office Actions” and the informational video “Response to Office Action” for more information and tips on responding.

 

ASSISTANCE

 

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.    

 

 

/Salima Parmar Oestreicher/

Salima Parmar Oestreicher

Examining Attorney

Law Office 108

(571) 272-6786

Salima.Oestreicher@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.  

 

 

 

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90186038 - LL LAY LAW, P.C. - N/A

To: Lay Law, P.C. (clifford@laylaw.net)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90186038 - LL LAY LAW, P.C. - N/A
Sent: January 28, 2021 03:27:34 PM
Sent As: ecom108@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on January 28, 2021 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90186038

 

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. 

 

 

/Salima Parmar Oestreicher/

Salima Parmar Oestreicher

Examining Attorney

Law Office 108

(571) 272-6786

Salima.Oestreicher@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 January 28, 2021, 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.”

 

 

 


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