Offc Action Outgoing

SNOWFLAKE UNIVERSITY

Snowflake Inc.

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90192328 - SNOWFLAKE UNIVERSITY - 120890.2240

To: Snowflake Inc. (rochelle.alpert@morganlewis.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90192328 - SNOWFLAKE UNIVERSITY - 120890.2240
Sent: January 26, 2021 06:17:37 AM
Sent As: ecom114@uspto.gov
Attachments: Attachment - 1
Attachment - 2
Attachment - 3
Attachment - 4
Attachment - 5
Attachment - 6
Attachment - 7
Attachment - 8
Attachment - 9
Attachment - 10
Attachment - 11
Attachment - 12
Attachment - 13
Attachment - 14

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

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

 

U.S. Application Serial No. 90192328

 

Mark:  SNOWFLAKE UNIVERSITY

 

 

 

 

Correspondence Address: 

ROCHELLE D. ALPERT

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

ONE MARKET, SPEAR ST. TOWER, 25TH FL.

MORGAN LEWIS

SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105

 

 

Applicant:  Snowflake Inc.

 

 

 

Reference/Docket No. 120890.2240

 

Correspondence Email Address: 

 rochelle.alpert@morganlewis.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:  January 26, 2021

 

 

The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney as explained in the message left for the applicant’s attorney on January 20, 2021; no return communication was received.  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.

 

The requirement(s) apply to all of the goods and/or services listed in the application, unless otherwise stated.

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES:

 

  • Disclaimer.
  • Identification.
  • Prior registration.
  • Specimen.
  • Conditional information.

 

 

 

DISCLAIMER REQUIRED

 

Applicant must disclaim the wording “UNIVERSITY” 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). 

 

A “disclaimer” is a statement in the application record that an applicant does not claim exclusive rights to an unregistrable component of the mark.  See Schwarzkopf v. John H. Breck, Inc., 340 F.2d 978, 979-80, 144 USPQ 433, 433 (C.C.P.A. 1965); TMEP §1213.  A disclaimer does not physically remove the disclaimed matter from the mark or otherwise affect the appearance of the mark.  See Schwarzkopf v. John H. Breck, Inc., 340 F.2d at 979, 144 USPQ2d at 433; TMEP §1213.

 

If applicant does not provide the required disclaimer, the USPTO may refuse to register the entire mark.  See In re Stereotaxis Inc., 429 F.3d 1039, 1041, 77 USPQ2d 1087, 1089 (Fed. Cir. 2005); TMEP §1213.01(b).

 

The applicant’s services are identified as educational services, namely, non-downloadable courses on cloud management, data warehousing, data analytics, data management, data mining, data sharing, data exchange, data migration, data integration and database administration, and distribution of training materials in connection therewith; training in the use and operation of data warehouse platforms, data analytics and cloud management.  The attached dictionary definition defines UNIVERSITY as “[a]n institution for higher learning with teaching and research facilities typically including a graduate school and professional schools that award master's degrees and doctorates and an undergraduate division that awards bachelor's degrees.”  The attached internet evidence from the applicant’s website shows that the wording at issue has a merely descriptive meaning in relation to the applicant’s services and/or in the relevant trade or industry.  For purposes of evaluating a trademark, material obtained from the Internet is generally accepted as competent evidence.  See In re Bayer Aktiengesellschaft, 488 F.3d 960, 966, 82 USPQ2d 1828, 1833 (Fed. Cir. 2007); In re Reed Elsevier Props., Inc., 482 F.3d 1376, 1380, 82 USPQ2d 1378, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2007); TBMP §1208.03; TMEP §710.01(b).

 

The attached third party registration(s) also shows that the wording at issue is merely descriptive of the applicant’s services.  Third-party registrations featuring goods and/or services the same as or similar to applicant’s services are probative evidence on the issue of descriptiveness where the relevant word or term is disclaimed, registered under Trademark Act Section 2(f) based on acquired distinctiveness, or registered on the Supplemental Register.  E.g., In re Morinaga Nyugyo Kabushiki Kaisha, 120 USPQ2d 1738, 1745 (TTAB 2016) (quoting Inst. Nat’l des Appellations D’Origine v. Vintners Int’l Co., 958 F.2d 1574, 1581-82, 22 USPQ2d 1190, 1196 (Fed. Cir. 1992)); In re Box Solutions Corp., 79 USPQ2d 1953, 1955 (TTAB 2006).

 

Consequently, purchasers who encounter the wording UNIVERSITY in relation to the identified services would immediately understand that the wording UNIVERSITY is merely descriptive of an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose, or use of applicant’s services; the wording would not indicate that the applicant is the sole source of the identified services.  Moreover, businesses and competitors should be free to use descriptive language when describing their own goods and/or services to the public in advertising and marketing materials without the possibility of costly infringement suits brought by the trademark or service mark owner.  See In re Abcor Dev. Corp., 588 F.2d 811, 813, 200 USPQ 215, 217 (C.C.P.A. 1978); In re Styleclick.com Inc., 58 USPQ2d 1523, 1527 (TTAB 2001); TMEP §1209.  Allowing the registration of the applicant’s merely descriptive wording would inhibit competition in the marketplace.  See In re Abcor Dev. Corp., 588 F.2d 811, 813, 200 USPQ 215, 217 (C.C.P.A. 1978); TMEP §1209.  Therefore, UNIVERSITY, as applied to the identified services, is merely descriptive of an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose, or use of applicant’s services and must be disclaimed.

 

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

 

No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “UNIVERSITY” 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. 

 

 

 

IDENTIFICATION OF SERVICES

 

The identification of services is indefinite and must be clarified.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01.  The applicant must identify the services specifically to provide public notice to the average person who does not have an in-depth knowledge of the relevant field(s) and to enable the USPTO to classify the services properly and to reach informed judgments concerning likelihood of confusion under 15 U.S.C. §1052(d). 

 

In an identification, an applicant must use the common commercial or generic name for the services, be specific and all-inclusive, and avoid using indefinite words or phrases.  TMEP§§1402.01, 1402.03(a).  If the services have no common commercial or generic name, applicant must describe or explain the nature of the services using clear and succinct language.  See id.  If applicable, open-ended terms (e.g., “including,” “such as”) must be deleted and replaced with a definite term, such as “namely,” “consisting of,” “particularly,” or “in particular.”  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03(a). 

 

The applicant should describe the services using wording that would be generally understood by the average person.  See Schenley Indus., Inc. v. Battistoni, 112 USPQ 485, 486 (Comm’r Pats. 1957); Cal. Spray-Chem. Corp. v. Osmose Wood Pres. Co. of Am., 102 USPQ 321, 322 (Comm’r Pats. 1954); TMEP §1402.01. “[T]echnical, high-sounding verbiage” should be avoided.  Id., 102 USPQ at 322.

 

For assistance with identifying and classifying services in trademark applications, please see the USPTO’s online searchable U.S. Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual.  See TMEP §1402.04.

 

In this case, the applicant must clarify the nature of the services because the wording “non-downloadable courses” could potentially include goods recorded on various media in International Class 9.  The bolded wording and/or punctuation in the suggested identification below indicates a suggested addition(s) and/or amendment(s) to the applicant's current identification.   The applicant should refer to the suggested identification below for specific wording that requires clarification and/or reclassification. 

 

 

Applicant may adopt the following identification if accurate [changes in bold text]:

 

 

Educational services, namely, on-line non-downloadable courses on cloud management, data warehousing, data analytics, data management, data mining, data sharing, data exchange, data migration, data integration and database administration, and distribution of training materials in connection therewith; training in the use and operation of data warehouse platforms, data analytics and cloud management in International Class 41.

 

 

Applicant’s services may be clarified or limited, but may not be expanded beyond those originally itemized in the application or as acceptably amended.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06.  Applicant may clarify or limit the identification by inserting qualifying language or deleting items to result in a more specific identification; however, applicant may not substitute different goods and/or services or add goods and/or services not found or encompassed by those in the original application or as acceptably amended.  See TMEP §1402.06(a)-(b).  The scope of the services sets the outer limit for any changes to the identification and is generally determined by the ordinary meaning of the wording in the identification.  TMEP §§1402.06(b), 1402.07(a)-(b).  Any acceptable changes to the services will further limit scope, and once services are deleted, they are not permitted to be reinserted.  TMEP §1402.07(e).

 

 

 

PRIOR REGISTRATION

 

Applicant’s claim of ownership of U.S. Registration No. 5893945 will not be printed on any registration that may issue from this application because the marks are different.  Only prior registrations of the same or similar marks are considered related registrations for purposes of an ownership claim.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.36; TMEP §812.  The applicant need not respond to this issue.

 

 

 

SPECIMEN

 

Webpage specimen does not include required URL and/or date printed/accessed.  Registration is refused because the specimen is not acceptable as a webpage specimen; it lacks the required URL and/or date printed/accessed.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(c); TMEP §§904.03(i), 1301.04(a).  Thus, it is unclear whether the specimen shows the applied-for mark in actual use in commerce.  See Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051, 1127; 37 C.F.R. §§2.34(a)(1)(iv), 2.56(a); TMEP §§904, 904.03(g), 904.07(a).  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 goods and 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).

 

Any webpage printout or screenshot submitted as a specimen must include the webpage’s URL and the date it was accessed or printed on the specimen itself, within the TEAS form that submits the specimen, or in a verified statement under 37 C.F.R. §2.20 or 28 U.S.C. §1746 in a later-filed response.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(c); TMEP §§904.03(i), 1301.04(a).  Because the webpage specimen lacks the associated URL and/or access or print date on it, within the TEAS form used to submit the specimen, or in a verified statement in a later-filed response, it is unacceptable to show use of the mark in commerce.  TMEP §§904.03(i), 1301.04(a).

 

 

Examples of specimens.  Specimens for goods include a photograph of (1) the actual goods bearing the mark; (2) an actual container, packaging, tag or label for the goods bearing the mark; or (3) a point-of-sale display showing the mark directly associated with the goods.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(1), (c); TMEP §904.03(a)-(m).  A webpage specimen submitted as a display associated with the goods must show the mark in association with a picture or textual description of the goods and include information necessary for ordering the goods.  TMEP §904.03(i); see 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(1), (c). 

 

Specimens for services must show a direct association between the mark and the services and include:  (1) copies of advertising and marketing material, (2) a photograph of business signage or billboards, or (3) materials showing the mark in the sale, rendering, or advertising of the services.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.56(b)(2), (c); TMEP §1301.04(a), (h)(iv)(C). 

 

 

Response options.  Applicant may respond to this refusal by satisfying one of the following for each applicable international class:

 

(1)       Submit a verified statement, in a signed affidavit or supported by a declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20 or 28 U.S.C. §1746, specifying the URL of the original webpage specimen and the date it was accessed or printed.

 

(2)       Submit a different specimen (a verified “substitute” specimen), including the URL and date accessed/printed directly on the specimen itself or in a separate statement, 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 goods and/or services identified in the application or amendment to allege use.  Applicant must also submit 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.”

 

(3)       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.

 

For an overview of the response options referenced above and instructions on how to satisfy these options using the online Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Specimen webpage.

 

 

 

INFORMATION ABOUT SERVICES REQUIRED

 

The applicant must respond to this requirement only if the applicant does not enter the disclaimer.

 

To permit proper examination of the application, applicant must submit additional information about applicant’s services.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b); TMEP §§814, 1402.01(e).  The information requested below is reasonably necessary to the examination of the application because it will provide a more in-depth understanding of the mark, services, and/or issue(s) at hand.  TMEP §814.

 

Factual information about the services must clearly indicate what the services are and how they are rendered, their salient features, and their prospective customers and channels of trade.  Conclusory statements will not satisfy this requirement for information.

 

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. 

 

Merely stating that information about the services is available on applicant’s website is an insufficient response and will not make the relevant information of record.  See In re Planalytics, Inc., 70 USPQ2d 1453, 1457-58 (TTAB 2004).

 

 

The applicant must directly and completely answer the following question(s) and/or provide the information requested:

 

 

1.  Does UNIVERSITY have any significance as applied to the services other than service mark significance? 

 

 

2.  Does UNIVERSITY have any significance in the relevant trade or industry other than service mark significance? 

 

 

3.  If available, the applicant will provide a website address at which the services are offered and/or the mark is used.  If no website is available, then the applicant will state this fact for the record.

 

 

 

QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS ACTION

 

If the applicant has technical questions about the TEAS response to Office action form, the applicant may send technical questions to the TEAS Support Team at TEAS@uspto.gov via e-mail.  Please include your name, telephone number, serial number and/or registration number, a description of the issue, including the name of the TEAS form you are having problems with (e.g., “Response to Office Action Form,” “Request for Extension of Time to File a Statement of Use,” etc.), and a screen shot of any error message that you are receiving.  You should receive a response within two (2) hours if the e-mail message is submitted during normal business hours. 

 

 

For status inquiries or copies of documents, an applicant may check the status of or view documents filed in an application or registration using the Trademark Status and Document Retrieval (TSDR) system twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week.  Enter the application serial number or registration number and click on “Status” or “Documents.”  Do not attempt to check status until approximately four to five (4-5) days after submission of a filing, to allow sufficient time for all USPTO databases to be updated.  For help in resolving technical glitches, please email TSDR@uspto.gov.

 

 

For all other non-legal matters, including petitions to revive or reinstate an application, please contact the Trademark Assistance Center (TAC).  TAC may be reached by e-mail at TrademarkAssistanceCenter@uspto.gov or by telephone at (800) 786-9199.  For non-technical matters, TAC is open from 8:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST), Monday through Friday, except on federal government holidays.  A list of federal government holidays is available at the following website: http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/snow-dismissal-procedures/federal-holidays/.

 

 

If applicant has questions regarding the legal issues in this Office action, please call the assigned trademark examining attorney.

 

 

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

 

 

/Brian Pino/

Examining Attorney

Law Office 114

571.272.9209 Telephone

Brian.Pino2@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]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

Offc Action Outgoing [image/jpeg]

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90192328 - SNOWFLAKE UNIVERSITY - 120890.2240

To: Snowflake Inc. (rochelle.alpert@morganlewis.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90192328 - SNOWFLAKE UNIVERSITY - 120890.2240
Sent: January 26, 2021 06:17:38 AM
Sent As: ecom114@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on January 26, 2021 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90192328

 

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. 

 

 

/Brian Pino/

Examining Attorney

Law Office 114

571.272.9209 Telephone

Brian.Pino2@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 26, 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