To: | The Kriete Group, LLC (pto-wis@huschblackwell.com) |
Subject: | U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 90611648 - KAMP - KGI-41316 |
Sent: | November 10, 2021 04:22:13 PM |
Sent As: | ecom123@uspto.gov |
Attachments: | Attachment - 1 Attachment - 2 Attachment - 3 Attachment - 4 Attachment - 5 Attachment - 6 Attachment - 7 |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application
U.S. Application Serial No. 90611648
Mark: KAMP
|
|
Correspondence Address: 33 EAST MAIN STREET, SUITE 300
|
|
Applicant: The Kriete Group, LLC
|
|
Reference/Docket No. KGI-41316
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: November 10, 2021
INTRODUCTION
SEARCH OF USPTO DATABASE OF MARKS
The trademark examining attorney searched the USPTO database of registered and pending marks and found no conflicting registered marks that would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d). 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); TMEP §704.02. However, a mark in a prior-filed pending application may present a bar to registration of applicant’s mark.
POTENTIAL SECTION 2(d) REFUSAL – PRIOR PENDING APPLICATION
The filing date of pending U.S. Application Serial No. 90330383 precedes applicant’s filing date. See attached referenced application. If the mark in the referenced application registers, applicant’s mark may be refused registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d) because of a likelihood of confusion with the registered mark. See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); 37 C.F.R. §2.83; TMEP §§1208 et seq. Therefore, upon receipt of applicant’s response to this Office action, action on this application may be suspended pending final disposition of the earlier-filed referenced application.
In response to this Office action, applicant may present arguments in support of registration by addressing the issue of the potential conflict between applicant’s mark and the mark in the referenced application. Applicant’s election not to submit arguments at this time in no way limits applicant’s right to address this issue later if a refusal under Section 2(d) issues.
Although the applicant is not required to respond to the issue of the prior pending application, the applicant must respond to the below requirement within six months of the mailing date of this Office action to avoid abandonment.
IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS AMENDMENT REQUIRED
Applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate:
Class 012: aftermarket parts for commercial trucks and trailers, namely, {specify actual parts e.g., truck bed extender and storage box}
Applicant’s goods 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 or add goods not found or encompassed by those in the original application or as acceptably amended. See TMEP §1402.06(a)-(b). The scope of the goods 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 goods will further limit scope, and once goods and/or services are deleted, they are not permitted to be reinserted. TMEP §1402.07(e).
For assistance with identifying and classifying goods in trademark applications, please see the USPTO’s online searchable U.S. Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual. See TMEP §1402.04.
TELEPHONE/EMAIL FOR CLARIFICATION RECOMMENDED
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 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.
/Collier L Johnson II/
Collier L Johnson II
Examining Attorney
Law Office 123
571-270-0878
collier.johnson@uspto.gov
RESPONSE GUIDANCE