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:  June 10, 2021

 

INTRODUCTION

 

This Office action is in response to applicant’s communication filed on January 18, 2021.

 

In a previous Office action dated December 8, 2020, the trademark examining attorney refused registration of the applied-for mark based on Trademark Act Section 2(d) for a likelihood of confusion with a registered mark.  In addition, the trademark examining attorney refused applicant’s specimen of use because it was not an acceptable webpage specimen as it lacked the required URL and date printed/accessed.  Finally, applicant was required to disclaim descriptive wording in the mark.

 

Based on applicant’s response, the trademark examining attorney notes that the requirement to disclaim descriptive wording in the mark has been satisfied.

 

The following refusal has also been obviated:  refusal of applicant’s specimen of use because it was not an acceptable webpage specimen as it lacked the required URL and date printed/accessed.

 

The Trademark Act Section 2(d) registration refusal based on a likelihood of confusion with a registered mark is continued and maintained.  Applicant’s contentions will be fully address in a future action.  Nevertheless it is noted that applicant contends that the parties’ services are different and, therefore, consumer confusion is not likely.  When making a likelihood of confusion determination, the parties’ 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).

 

Further, applicant’s communication raises new issues that are addressed below.

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES that applicant must address:

• Section 44(d) Basis Invalid
• U.S. Applicant Asserts Section 44 Basis
• Claim of Ownership of Abandoned Application

 

 

SECTION 44(d) BASIS INVALID

 

The application was amended to include a claim of priority under Trademark Act Section 44(d) as a filing basis in the application.  However, applicant did not provide any information concerning the foreign filing; therefore, it appears that applicant did not file the U.S. application within six months of the foreign filing, as Section 44(d) requires.  15 U.S.C. §1126(d)(1); 37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(4)(i); TMEP §806.01(c).  Therefore, the priority claim is invalid and cannot be accepted.  TMEP §1003.02. 

 

Applicant may withdraw the priority claim by instructing the trademark examining attorney to delete it from the application record.  TMEP §1002.05.

 

 

U.S. APPLICANT ASSERTS SECTION 44 BASIS

 

Applicant is domiciled in the United States and has asserted a Trademark Act Section 44(e) filing basis in its application.  See 15 U.S.C. §1126(e); 37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(3).  However, an applicant domiciled in the United States is generally not eligible to register a mark under Section 44(e) unless the applicant (1) owns a trademark registration from a foreign country that is a party to a treaty or agreement relating to trademarks to which the United States is also a party or extends reciprocal rights to nationals of the United States, and (2) can establish that the foreign country in which the trademark is registered is the applicant’s country of origin.  15 U.S.C. §1126(b)-(c); see TMEP §§1002.03-.05.  “Country of origin” refers to a country other than the United States in which an applicant has a bona fide and effective industrial or commercial establishment, or if there is no such establishment, the foreign country in which an applicant is domiciled.  15 U.S.C. §1126(c); TMEP §1002.04-.05.

 

If applicant intends to rely on Section 44(e) as a basis for registration, applicant must submit the following:

 

(1)       A true copy, photocopy, certification or certified copy of the foreign trademark registration upon which applicant is relying for U.S. registration, along with an English translation if the foreign registration certificate is not written in English.  See 15 U.S.C. §1126(e); 37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(3)(ii); TMEP §§1002.05, 1004 et seq.  If applicant submits a copy of the foreign registration, it must be a copy of a document that has been issued to the applicant by or certified by the intellectual property office in the applicant’s country of origin.  TMEP §1004.01; and

 

(2)       A written statement that applicant has a bona fide and effective industrial or commercial establishment in the foreign country in which its mark is registered.  See 15 U.S.C. §1126(c); TMEP §§1002.01, 1002.04-.05.

 

If applicant cannot satisfy the above requirements for a Section 44(e) basis, applicant can amend the application to substitute a Section 1(a) or Section 1(b) basis, if applicant can satisfy all of the requirements for the new basis.  See 15 U.S.C. §§1051(a)-(b), 1126(e); 37 C.F.R. §2.35(b), TMEP §806.03.

 

 

CLAIM OF OWNERSHIP OF ABANDONED APPLICATION

 

Applicant has claimed ownership of U.S. Application Serial No. 8762688 (it is noted that “8762688” is an incomplete serial number).  Further, the trademark examining attorney notes that U.S. Application Serial No. 87626882, which was filed by applicant, was abandoned on March 26, 2019.  Only claims of ownership of relevant, active registrations are printed on the registration certificate.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.36; TMEP §812.  Therefore, applicant’s claim of ownership of the abandoned application will not be printed. 

 

 

ADVISORY – RESPONSE 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.

 

 

/Christopher M. Law/

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 103

(571) 272-2913

christopher.law@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 June 10, 2021 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90212811

 

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. 

 

 

/Christopher M. Law/

Trademark Examining Attorney

Law Office 103

(571) 272-2913

christopher.law@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 June 10, 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.”