Offc Action Outgoing

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

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

 

 

 

FINAL 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) and/or Electronic System for Trademark Trials and Appeals (ESTTA).  A link to the appropriate TEAS response form and/or to ESTTA for an appeal appears at the end of this Office action. 

 

Issue date:  November 17, 2021

 

INTRODUCTION

 

This Office action is in response to applicant’s communication filed on October 5, 2021. (Response)

 

In a previous Office action dated April 6, 2021, the trademark examining attorney refused registration of the applied-for mark based on the following:  Trademark Act Sections 1, 2 & 45 name of a performing artist refusal for the goods in Class 009.  In addition, applicant was required to satisfy the following requirements:  provide the consent to register statements of the living individual named on the mark, as well as pay the processing fees per class for loss of TEAS Plus status.

 

Based on applicant’s Response, the trademark examining attorney notes that the following requirement has been satisfied: processing fees provided for Loss of TEAS Plus status. See TMEP §§713.02, 714.04. 

 

However, the trademark examining attorney has reviewed applicant’s arguments and evidence submitted in response to the name of a performing artist refusal and found them unpersuasive. In addition, while applicant provided the consent to register statement, applicant submitted a consent that included a signature made with document-signing software.  However, the USPTO cannot accept this consent because applicant signed it using a method other than one authorized by 37 C.F.R. §2.193(a), (c).  Therefore, the examining attorney maintains and now makes FINAL the refusal and requirement in the summary of issues below.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b); TMEP §714.04.

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES MADE FINAL that applicant must address:

• Refusal Under Trademark Act Sections 1, 2 & 45- Name of an Artist Refusal-Class 009
• Consent of Living Individual Required

 

NAME OF AN ARTIST REFUSAL- CLASS 009

THIS REFUSAL APPLIES TO THE GOODS IN CLASS 009 ONLY

Registration is refused because the applied-for mark, as used on the specimen of record, merely identifies the name of a featured performer on a sound recording; it does not function as a trademark to indicate the source of applicant’s goods and to identify and distinguish them from others.  Trademark Act Sections 1, 2 and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051-1052, 1127; see In re Polar Music Int’l AB, 714 F.2d 1567, 1572, 221 USPQ 315, 318 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re Arnold, 105 USPQ2d 1953, 1957 (TTAB 2013).  Sound recordings include musical and other performances presented in recorded or electronic form.  See TMEP §1202.09(a). In this case, the applied-for mark, “LIL BABY” appears as the name of a music artist on sound recordings. While the applicant has submitted evidence of use of the name on a series of music sound recordings, the record does not contain sufficient evidence showing that the name is promoted and recognized by others as the source of the series of sound recordings OR that the performer controls the quality of the recordings and controls the use of the name.

 

While applicant submitted evidence in the Response demonstrating that the name is used on a series of sound recordings, the evidence does not demonstrate the second element of the test, namely, that the name is promoted and recognized by others as the source of the series of sound recordings, or that the performer controls the quality of the recordings and controls the use of the name.

 

The third party reviews and acknowledgements from the recording industry establish that the applicant is a well-known musician, showing name recognition as an artist. For example, “Lil Baby Has Become a Superstar” and “Lil Baby’s “The Big Picture” gets certified double-platinum” shows the fame and success of the artist. However, applicant needs to demonstrate that the name is promoted and recognized by others as the source of the series of sound recordings or that the performer controls the quality of the recordings and controls the use of the name. While there is a reference in the Forbes article to applicant launching his own label, this reference appears in only one of the pieces of evidence attached by applicant, refers to a different name for the label, and thus evidence relating to control over the mark is limited and unclear.

 

The record must show that the name serves as more than a designation of performer, i.e., that it also serves to identify the source of the series. See In re Arnold, 105 USPQ2d 1953, 1959-60 (TTAB 2013) (holding BLATANCY fails to function as a mark because it merely identifies the name of a performer featured on applicant’s musical recordings, and finding the evidence relating to control over the mark and the nature and quality of the goods conflicting and of uncertain meaning); In re First Draft, 76 USPQ2d 1183, 1191 (TTAB 2005) (holding pseudonym FERN MICHAELS identifies only the author and does not function as a mark to identify and distinguish a series of fictional books because the “evidence of promotion” was “indirect and rather scant,” despite applicant’s showing that the name had been used as an author's name for 30 years; that 67 separate books had been published under the name, and approximately 6 million copies had been sold; that the book jackets listed the titles of other works by Fern Michaels and promoted her as a bestselling author; that the author had been inducted into the New Jersey Literary Hall of Fame; and that there was a www.fernmichaels.com website). TMEP §1202.09(a)(ii)

 

An applicant may show that the name of an author or performing artist functions as a source indicator by submitting documentary evidence that the author/performer controls the quality of his or her distributed works and controls the use of his or her name. Such evidence would include license agreements and other documentary or contractual evidence. See In re Polar Music Int’l AB, 714 F.2d 1567, 1572, 221 USPQ 315, 318 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (holding the name of the musical group ABBA functions as a mark for sound recordings where a license agreement showed that the owner of the mark, ABBA, controlled the quality of the goods, and other contractual evidence showed that the owner also controlled the use of the name of the group).

 

If the applicant maintains control over the quality of the goods because the goods are published or recorded directly under the applicant’s control, the applicant may submit a verified statement that "the applicant publishes or produces the goods and controls their quality." In re Arnold, 105 USPQ2d 1953, 1958 (TTAB 2013). §1202.09(a)(ii)(B)

 

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

 

(1) Submitting additional evidence that (a) the name is used on a series of sound recordings, and (b) the name is promoted and recognized by others as the source of the series of sound recordings.  See In re Arnold, 105 USPQ2d at 1958; TMEP §1202.09(a)-(a)(ii)(A).  Evidence of a series includes copies or photographs of at least two different CD covers or similar packaging for recorded works that show the name sought to be registered.  TMEP §1202.09(a)(i); see In re Polar Music Int’l AB, 714 F.2d at 1572, 221 USPQ at 318.  Evidence that the name is promoted and recognized by others as a source of the series includes advertising that promotes the name as the source of the series, third-party reviews showing use of the name by others to refer to the series, and/or declarations from the sound recording industry, retailers, and purchasers showing recognition of the name as an indicator of the source of a series of recordings.  TMEP §1202.09(a)(ii)(A); cf. In re First Draft, Inc., 76 USPQ2d 1183, 1191 (TTAB 2005); In re Scholastic, Inc., 23 USPQ2d 1774, 1777-78 (TTAB 1992).

 

(2) Submitting evidence that (a) the name is used on a series of sound recordings, and (b) the performer controls the quality of the recordings and controls the use of the name, such that the name has come to represent an assurance of quality to the public.  See In re Polar Music Int’l AB, 714 F.2d at 1572, 221 USPQ at 318; In re Arnold, 105 USPQ2d at 1958; TMEP §1202.09(a)-(a)(ii), (a)(ii)(B).  Evidence of a series includes copies or photographs of at least two different CD covers or similar packaging for recorded works that show the name sought to be registered.  TMEP §1202.09(a)(i); see In re Polar Music Int’l AB, 714 F.2d at 1572, 221 USPQ at 318.  Evidence of control over the quality of the recordings and use of the name includes licensing contracts or similar documentation.  TMEP §1202.09(a)(ii)(B); see In re Polar Music Int’l AB, 714 F.2d at 1568-72, 221 USPQ at 316-18.  However, if the sound recordings are recorded directly under applicant’s control, applicant may submit solely as evidence of control the following statement, verified with an affidavit or signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20:  “The applicant produces the goods and controls their quality.”  TMEP §1202.09(a)(ii)(B); see 37 C.F.R. §2.193(e)(1).

 

(3) Amending the application to seek registration on the Supplemental Register.  Trademark Act Section 23, 15 U.S.C. §1091; see 37 C.F.R. §§2.47, 2.75(a); TMEP §§816, 1202.09(a).

If applicant cannot satisfy one of the above requirements, applicant may amend the application from a use in commerce basis under Trademark Act Section 1(a) to an intent to use basis under Section 1(b), and the refusal will be withdrawn.  See TMEP §806.03(c).  However, if applicant amends the basis to Section 1(b), registration will not be granted until applicant later amends the application back to use in commerce by filing an acceptable allegation of use along with satisfying one of the above requirements.  See 15 U.S.C. §1051(c), (d); 37 C.F.R. §§2.76, 2.88; TMEP §1103.  If the same specimen is submitted with an allegation of use, and applicant does not either provide the additional evidence described above or amend to the Supplemental Register, the same refusal will issue.

To amend to Section 1(b), applicant must submit the following statement, verified with an affidavit or signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20:  “Applicant has a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce and had a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce as of the filing date of the application.”  37 C.F.R. §2.34(a)(2); TMEP §806.01(b); see 15 U.S.C. §1051(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.35(b)(1), 2.193(e)(1).

CONSENT OF LIVING INDIVIDUAL REQUIRED

Applicant submitted a consent that included a signature made with document-signing software.  However, the USPTO cannot accept this consent because applicant signed it using a method other than one authorized by 37 C.F.R. §2.193(a), (c).  A signature created by document-signing software is not a designated signing method; thus, the consent is not accepted and this requirement is made FINAL.  See 15 U.S.C. §1052(c); 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b); TMEP §§813, 1206.04(a).  Applicant must therefore resubmit the consent, properly signed using one of the methods specified in “How to sign a consent” below.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.193(a).

 

To submit a consent using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS).  Open the TEAS Request for Reconsideration after Final Action form, answer “yes” to wizard question #3, under the “Name(s), Portrait(s), Signature(s) of Individual(s) ” heading in the “Additional Statement(s)” section, identify the individual whose consent is being made of record and use the “Click here to Attach/Remove Consent(s) ” button to upload the JPG/PDF image file of the consent, which cannot exceed 5 megabytes per attachment; and then follow the instructions within the form for signing.   

 

How to sign a consent.  Applicant must use one of the following methods for signing TEAS forms:

 

(1)       Electronic typed signature.  In the TEAS signature block, the signer personally types any combination of letters, numbers, spaces, and/or punctuation marks that the signer has adopted as a signature, placed between two forward slash (/) symbols (e.g., /john doe/).  When the filer is not the actual signer of the form, the filer may e-mail the completed unsigned form from within TEAS to the signer to personally type his or her e-signature, after which the form will be automatically returned to the filer for submission.

 

(2)       Pen-and-ink traditional handwritten signature.  The filer prints out the completed form in text format and mails or faxes it to the signer who reviews and personally signs and dates it in the usual pen-and-ink manner.  The signature and date portion, together with the wording of a declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20, if required, is then scanned as a jpg or pdf image file and attached to the form for submission. 

 

See 37 C.F.R. §2.193(a); TMEP §§611.01(c), 804.03. 

 

In addition, the name of the signer must also be clearly printed or typed near the signature.  37 C.F.R. §2.193(d); TMEP §611.01(c).  The signer’s particular title or position must also be specified.  37 C.F.R. §2.193(d).

 

How to respond.  Click to file a request for reconsideration of this final Office action that fully resolves all outstanding requirements and refusals and/or click to file a timely appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) with the required filing fee(s).

 

 

/Lee-Anne Berns/

Examining Attorney

Law Office 118

(571) 272 1168

Lee-anne.Berns@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 November 17, 2021 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90293692

 

A USPTO examining attorney has reviewed your trademark application and issued an Office action.  You must respond to this Office action in order to avoid your application abandoning.  Follow the steps below.

 

(1)  Read the Office action HERE.  This email is NOT the Office action.

 

(2)  Respond to the Office action by the deadline using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS).  Your response must be received by the USPTO on or before 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  Otherwise, your application will be abandoned.  See the Office action itself regarding how to respond.

 

(3)  Direct general questions about using USPTO electronic forms, the USPTO website, the application process, the status of your application, and whether there are outstanding deadlines to the Trademark Assistance Center (TAC).

 

After reading the Office action, address any question(s) regarding the specific content to the USPTO examining attorney identified in the Office action.

 

 

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 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 may mail or email you trademark-related offers and notices – most of which require fees.  The USPTO will only email official USPTO correspondence from the domain “@uspto.gov.”

 

·        Hiring a U.S.-licensed attorney.  If you do not have an attorney and are not required to have one under the trademark rules, we encourage you to hire a U.S.-licensed attorney specializing in trademark law to help guide you through the registration process.  The USPTO examining attorney identified above is not your attorney and cannot give you legal advice, but rather works for and represents the USPTO in trademark matters.