To: | Shanghai Haijia Electric Appliance Co., ETC. (ipus1@brealant.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90219794 - MOYU - N/A |
Sent: | July 21, 2021 01:58:13 PM |
Sent As: | ecom125@uspto.gov |
Attachments: |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 90219794
Mark: MOYU
|
|
Correspondence Address: |
|
Applicant: Shanghai Haijia Electric Appliance Co., ETC.
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N/A
Correspondence Email Address: |
|
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: July 21, 2021
INTRODUCTION
This Office action is supplemental to and supersedes the previous Office action issued on March 01, 2021 in connection with this application. The assigned trademark examining attorney inadvertently omitted a refusal of registration relevant to the mark in the subject application. See TMEP §§706, 711.02. Specifically, the examining attorney inadvertently omitted a refusal for failure to show the applied-for mark in use in commerce with the applied-for goods.
The trademark examining attorney apologizes for any inconvenience caused by the delay in raising this issue.
Applicant must address all issues raised in this Office action, in addition to the issues raised in the Office action dated March 01, 2021. The issues raised in the previous March 01, 2021, Office action are as follows: Trademark Act Section 2(d) refusal for a likelihood of confusion with registered marks, requirement for an amended mark description, and an inquiry regarding the foreign wording in the mark.
The following requirement has been satisfied: satisfactory explanation provided regarding significance of foreign wording in mark. See TMEP §713.02.
In addition, the following refusal and requirement have been withdrawn: Trademark Act Section 2(d) refusal and requirement for an amended mark description. See id.
The following is a SUMMARY OF ISSUES that applicant must address:
SPECIMEN REFUSAL
Specifically, applicant has applied for the mark MOYU in International Class 007 for: “Clothes washing machines; Washing machines for household purposes.”
Applicant’s specimen consists of a webpage screenshot from eBay showing the mark in connection with a “foldable bucket washer.” The goods shown in the specimen do not appear to be washing machines as set forth in applicant’s identification. As such, applicant has not shown use of the mark in commerce with the applied-for goods.
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). 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).
Response options. Applicant may respond to this refusal by satisfying one of the following 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 goods 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.
(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.
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.
Applicant must respond to all issues raised in this Office action and the previous March 01, 2021, Office action, within six (6) months of the date of issuance of this Office action. 37 C.F.R. §2.62(a); see TMEP §711.02. If applicant does not respond within this time limit, the application will be abandoned. 37 C.F.R. §2.65(a).
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.
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 and requirement 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.
Lucy Ellen Browne
Examining Attorney
Law Office 125
571-270-0961
lucy.browne@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE