To: | LaunchSquad, Inc. (docketing@fisherbroyles.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90221478 - SPOOL - 13957.T001US |
Sent: | February 24, 2021 02:50:03 PM |
Sent As: | ecom101@uspto.gov |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 Attachment - 5 Attachment - 6 Attachment - 7 Attachment - 8 Attachment - 9 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 90221478
Mark: SPOOL
|
|
Correspondence Address:
|
|
Applicant: LaunchSquad, Inc.
|
|
Reference/Docket No. 13957.T001US
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: February 24, 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.
Search Results
Summary of Issues
Section 2(e)(1) Refusal—Mark is Merely Descriptive
Applicant’s applied-for mark is SPOOL for “Software as a service (SAAS) services featuring software for providing access to market intelligence and business analytics data”.
Registration is refused because the applied-for mark merely describes a characteristic or function of applicant’s services. Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); see TMEP §§1209.01(b), 1209.03 et seq.
The determination of whether a mark is merely descriptive is made in relation to an applicant’s services, not in the abstract. DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd., 695 F.3d 1247, 1254, 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1757 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re The Chamber of Commerce of the U.S., 675 F.3d 1297, 1300, 102 USPQ2d 1217, 1219 (Fed. Cir. 2012); TMEP §1209.01(b). “Whether consumers could guess what the product [or service] is from consideration of the mark alone is not the test.” In re Am. Greetings Corp., 226 USPQ 365, 366 (TTAB 1985).
Here, the attached evidence from Whatis.com, Definitions.net, Webopedia.com, PCMag.com, and Techopedia.com shows that SPOOL is an acronym for Simultaneous Peripheral Operations Online, and is a process “in which data is temporarily held to be used and executed by a device, program or the system”. Therefore, the wording is merely descriptive of applicant’s services, namely, software as a service featuring software that utilizes spooling.
Based on the evidence and analysis above, applicant’s applied for mark is merely descriptive and must be refused under Section 2(e)(1) of the Lanham Act.
Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal(s) by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.
Generic Advisory
Assistance
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.
/Catherine Caycedo/
Catherine Caycedo
Trademark Examining Attorney
Law Office 101
(571) 272-7066
Catherine.Caycedo@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE