Priority Action

GOLF LE FLEUR

Flower Boy Trademarks, LLC

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 97042384 - GOLF LE FLEUR - FBTM 2111059

To: Flower Boy Trademarks, LLC (Apolzon-Docket@fzlz.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 97042384 - GOLF LE FLEUR - FBTM 2111059
Sent: November 16, 2021 03:35:56 PM
Sent As: ecom113@uspto.gov
Attachments: Attachment - 1
Attachment - 2
Attachment - 3
Attachment - 4
Attachment - 5
Attachment - 6
Attachment - 7
Attachment - 8
Attachment - 9
Attachment - 10
Attachment - 11
Attachment - 12
Attachment - 13

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

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

 

U.S. Application Serial No. 97042384

 

Mark:  GOLF LE FLEUR

 

 

        

 

Correspondence Address: 

       LAWRENCE E. APOLZON

       FROSS ZELNICK LEHRMAN & ZISSU, P.C.

       151 WEST 42ND ST., 17TH FL.

       NEW YORK, NY 10036

      

 

 

 

 

Applicant:  Flower Boy Trademarks, LLC

 

 

 

Reference/Docket No. FBTM 2111059

 

Correspondence Email Address: 

       Apolzon-Docket@fzlz.com

 

 

 

PRIORITY ACTION

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 16, 2021

 

 

The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney.  15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.

 

USPTO database searched; no conflicting marks found.  The trademark examining attorney searched the USPTO database of registered and pending marks and found no conflicting marks that would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d).  15 U.S.C. §1052(d); TMEP §704.02.

 

Applicant must address issues shown below.  On November 15, 2021, the examining attorney and Lawrence E. Apolzon, Esq., discussed the issues below.  Applicant must timely respond to these issues.  See 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §2.62(a); TMEP §708.05.

 

Summary of Issues Applicant Must Address

  • Requirement for Disclaimer
  • Requirement for Translation Statement
  • Requirement for Acceptable Identification of Goods

 

Requirement for Disclaimer

 

The applicant has applied to register the mark GOLF LE FLEUR in standard character form for:

 

Small accessories including claw clips for hair; clothing accessories including brooches for clothing, charms for attachment to zipper pulls, shoe laces, belt buckles, ornamental cloth patches, and clothing buttons, in Class 26.

 

Applicant must disclaim the wording “GOLF” because it is merely descriptive of an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose, or use of applicant’s goods.  See 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd., 695 F.3d 1247, 1251, 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1755 (Fed. Cir. 2012); TMEP §§1213, 1213.03(a). 

 

A “disclaimer” is a statement in the application record that an applicant does not claim exclusive rights to an unregistrable component of the mark.  See Schwarzkopf v. John H. Breck, Inc., 340 F.2d 978, 979-80, 144 USPQ 433, 433 (C.C.P.A. 1965); TMEP §1213.  A disclaimer does not physically remove the disclaimed matter from the mark or otherwise affect the appearance of the mark.  See Schwarzkopf v. John H. Breck, Inc., 340 F.2d at 979, 144 USPQ2d at 433; TMEP §1213.

 

The term “golf” refers to “A game played on a large outdoor course with a series of 9 or 18 holes spaced far apart, the object being to propel a small, hard ball with the use of various clubs into each hole with as few strokes as possible.”  The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language (5th ed. 2020), http://www.ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=golf.

 

The applicant’s goods are clothing accessories that either may be intended for use while playing golf, or that may feature golf designs.  Thus, purchasers who encounter GOLF on the identified goods would immediately understand that applicant’s goods feature these characteristics, and thus the term GOLF must therefore be disclaimed.

 

The applicant has provided similar disclaimers in its prior registrations and published application, see attached, for clothing and other goods and services.

 

If applicant does not provide the required disclaimer, the USPTO may refuse to register the entire mark.  See In re Stereotaxis Inc., 429 F.3d 1039, 1041, 77 USPQ2d 1087, 1089 (Fed. Cir. 2005); TMEP §1213.01(b).

 

Applicant may respond to this issue by submitting a disclaimer in the following format: 

 

No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “GOLF” apart from the mark as shown. 

 

For an overview of disclaimers and instructions on how to provide one using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), see the Disclaimer webpage. 

 

Requirement for Translation

 

To permit proper examination of the application, applicant must submit an English translation of the foreign wording in the mark.  37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(9), 2.61(b); see TMEP §809. 

 

Based on the statements in the applicant’s prior registrations and published application, the following English translation is suggested:

 

The English translation of “LE FLEUR” in the mark is “THE FLOWER”. 

 

TMEP §809.03.  The applicant is also referred to the attached translation evidence.

 

Requirement for Acceptable Identification of Goods

 

Applicant’s goods are identified as:

 

Small accessories including claw clips for hair; clothing accessories including brooches for clothing, charms for attachment to zipper pulls, shoe laces, belt buckles, ornamental cloth patches, and clothing buttons, in Class 26.

 

The wording “including” in the identification of goods is indefinite and must be deleted and replaced with a definite term, such as “namely,” “consisting of,” “particularly,” or “in particular.”  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03(a).  The identification must be specific and all-inclusive.  This wording is an open-ended term (e.g., “including” and “such as”) that is not acceptable because it fails to identify specific goods.  See TMEP §1402.03(a). 

 

The suggested amendments below replaces this term with “namely.”

 

To summarize, applicant may adopt any or all of the following identifications of goods, if accurate:

 

Small accessories, namely, claw clips for hair; clothing accessories, namely, brooches for clothing, charms for attachment to zipper pulls, shoe laces, belt buckles, ornamental cloth patches, and clothing buttons, in Class 26.

 

See TMEP §1402.01.

 

For assistance with identifying and classifying goods and services in trademark applications, please see the USPTO’s online searchable U.S. Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual.  See TMEP §1402.04.

 

Applicant’s goods and/or services 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 and/or services or add goods and/or services 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 and/or services 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 and/or services will further limit scope, and once goods and/or services are deleted, they are not permitted to be reinserted.  TMEP §1402.07(e).

 

 

 

How to respond.  Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action.

 

 

 

 

/Kim Teresa Moninghoff/

Examining Attorney

Law Office 113

Phone:  571-272-4738

Email:  kim.moninghoff@uspto.gov

 

 

 

 

RESPONSE GUIDANCE

  • Missing the response deadline to this letter will cause the application to abandon.  The response must be received by the USPTO before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  TEAS maintenance or unforeseen circumstances could affect an applicant’s ability to timely respond.  

 

 

 

 

Priority Action [image/jpeg]

Priority Action [image/jpeg]

Priority Action [image/jpeg]

Priority Action [image/jpeg]

Priority Action [image/jpeg]

Priority Action [image/jpeg]

Priority Action [image/jpeg]

Priority Action [image/jpeg]

Priority Action [image/jpeg]

Priority Action [image/jpeg]

Priority Action [image/jpeg]

Priority Action [image/jpeg]

Priority Action [image/jpeg]

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 97042384 - GOLF LE FLEUR - FBTM 2111059

To: Flower Boy Trademarks, LLC (Apolzon-Docket@fzlz.com)
Subject: U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 97042384 - GOLF LE FLEUR - FBTM 2111059
Sent: November 16, 2021 03:35:59 PM
Sent As: ecom113@uspto.gov
Attachments:

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

 

USPTO OFFICIAL NOTICE

 

Office Action (Official Letter) has issued

on November 16, 2021 for

U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 97042384

 

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.

 

 

 


uspto.report is an independent third-party trademark research tool that is not affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or any other governmental organization. The information provided by uspto.report is based on publicly available data at the time of writing and is intended for informational purposes only.

While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information displayed on this site. The use of this site is at your own risk. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

All official trademark data, including owner information, should be verified by visiting the official USPTO website at www.uspto.gov. This site is not intended to replace professional legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for consulting with a legal professional who is knowledgeable about trademark law.

© 2024 USPTO.report | Privacy Policy | Resources | RSS Feed of Trademarks | Trademark Filings Twitter Feed