`
`
`
`Sent: 6/3/2016 5:07:15 PM
`
`
`
`To: TTAB EFiling
`
`
`
`CC:
`
`
`
`Subject: U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 86491495 - TAMALPAIS SURF CLUB THE TIME TUNNEL -
`N/A - Request for Reconsideration Denied - Return to TTAB
`
`
`
`*************************************************
`
`Attachment Information:
`
`Count: 1
`
`Files: 86491495.doc
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
`OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
`
`
`U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 86491495
`
`
`
`MARK: TAMALPAIS SURF CLUB THE TIME TUNNEL
`
`
`
`CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS:
` MATTHEW H SWYERS
`
` THE TRADEMARK COMPANY
`
` 344 MAPLE AVE W # 151
`
` VIENNA, VA 22180-5612
`
`
`
`APPLICANT: McCarthy, Nathan
`
`
`
`CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO:
`
` N/A
`
`CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS:
`
` mswyers@thetrademarkcompany.com
`
`
`
`*86491495*
`
`
`
`GENERAL TRADEMARK INFORMATION:
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/index.jsp
`
`
`
`VIEW YOUR APPLICATION FILE
`
`
`
`
`
`REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED
`
`
`
`
`
`ISSUE/MAILING DATE: 6/3/2016
`
`This Office action concerns applicant’s request for reconsideration filed on May 31, 2016.
`
`
`
`The trademark examining attorney has carefully reviewed applicant’s request for reconsideration and is
`denying the request for the reasons stated below. See 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b)(3); TMEP §§715.03(a)(ii)(B),
`715.04(a).
`
`
`
`REQUEST TO CHANGE OWNER DENIED – NO ASSIGNMENT FILED
`
`
`
`
`
`Applicant has requested that the owner be amended; however, applicant has not provided a reason for
`this request, or provided or recorded ownership transfer documentation. The original applicant is listed
`as a partnership made up of Nathan McCarthy and William Hutchinson doing business as ProofLab;
`applicant seeks to amend this to a corporation (applicant has not provided the name of the corporation,
`though it is presumed to be ProofLab, as applicant indicated in its January 2, 2015 response, since the
`name of two individuals with entity types listed as “corporation” would create an ambiguity). While an
`application can be amended to correct an inadvertent error in the manner in which an applicant’s name
`is set forth (see TMEP §1201.02(c)), an application cannot be amended to substitute another entity as
`the applicant. See TMEP §803.06. Amending the owner from a partnership to a corporation would
`constitute substituting another entity as the applicant without filing an assignment.
`
`
`
`An application is void if it was filed in the name of a party who did not own, or was not entitled to use,
`the applied-for mark on the application filing date. 37 C.F.R. §2.71(d); Huang v. Tzu Wei Chen Food Co.,
`849 F.2d 1458, 1459-60, 7 USPQ2d 1335, 1335-36 (Fed. Cir. 1988); TMEP §§803.06, 1201.02(b); see 15
`U.S.C. §1051(a)(1). A void application cannot be cured by amendment or assignment. TMEP §§803.06,
`1201.02(b); see 37 C.F.R. §2.71(d). In these cases, the true owner must file a new application. TMEP
`§803.06.
`
`
`
`Accordingly, because applicant has not clarified whether the proper party filed the original application,
`the request for reconsideration is DENIED. The refusal of the application made final in the Office action
`dated November 28, 2015, is maintained and continues to be final. See TMEP §§715.03(a)(ii)(B),
`715.04(a).
`
`
`
`CASE RETURNED TO TTAB FOR RESUMPTION OF APPEAL
`
`
`
`Applicant has filed a timely notice of appeal with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, and therefore
`the Board will be notified to resume the appeal. See TMEP §715.04(a).
`
`
`
`
`
`/Andrew Leaser/
`
`Trademark Examining Attorney
`
`Law Office 117
`
`(571) 272-1911
`
`andrew.leaser@uspto.gov

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ ChargeStill Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site