| To: | CRYPTO DAILY PTE LTD (tmapps@krinternetlaw.com) |
| Subject: | TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 97229554 - CRYPTODAILY - N/A |
| Sent: | 1/27/2022 3:41:37 PM |
| Sent As: | ECOMPET |
| Attachments: |
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
|
U.S. Application Serial No. 97229554
U.S. Registration No.
Mark: CRYPTODAILY
|
|
|
Correspondence Address: KELLY MULCAHY KRONENBERGER ROSENFELD, LLP 150 POST ST., SUITE 520 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94108
|
|
|
Owner: CRYPTO DAILY PTE LTD
|
|
|
Reference/Docket No. N/A
Correspondence Email Address: tmapps@krinternetlaw.com |
|
PETITION TO DIRECTOR DENIED
Issue date: January 27, 2022
Dear Mr. Mulcahy:
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) received a petition to make special filed in connection with the above-identified trademark application on January 24, 2022.
DISCUSSION
Invoking supervisory authority under Trademark Rule 2.146 to make an application “special” is an extraordinary remedy that is granted only when very special circumstances exist, such as a demonstrable possibility of the loss of substantial rights. 37 C.F.R. §2.146. A petition to make “special” is denied when the circumstances would apply equally to a large number of other applicants. Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (TMEP) §1710.01. Commonly accepted types of evidence for granting Petitions to Make Special are copies of civil court complaints demonstrating the existence of pending litigation involving the mark, copies of cease-and-desist letters showing threatened litigation involving the mark, or copies of government regulations showing that a trademark registration is required to secure government approval for the goods or services. Id.
Petitioner states requested relief is appropriate because there exists actual and ongoing infringement of applicant’s mark in commerce. Namely, a third party unassociated with applicant has filed a federal trademark application. However, petitioner omitted the required supporting evidence of cease-and-desist letters demonstrating threatened litigation, or other evidence demonstrating an attempt to cease third-party infringement, from the petition. See TMEP §1710. In this case, the serial number 97075771 of the application showing use of your mark by a third-party, is insufficient supporting evidence. Therefore, petitioner has not satisfied the requirement to permit the application to advance out of the normal order of examination.
DECISION
The petition is hereby denied. The application will be processed in the order it was received.
Sincerely,
/Michael L Hines/
Paralegal Specialist
Office of the Deputy Commissioner
For Trademark Examination Policy
(571) 272-9618