PROVISIONAL REFUSAL OF PROTECTION
`
`The table below presents the data as entered.
`
`Input Field
`
`IDENTIFICATION SECTION
`
`INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
`
`1435634
`
`OFFICE REFERENCE
`
`ORIGINAL LANGUAGE CODE
`
`FILE SECTION
`
`79245971
`
`ENGLISH
`
`Entered
`
`FILE SPECIFICATION OF THE DOCUMENT
`
`\\TICRS\EXPORT17\IMAGEOUT17\792\459\79245971\xml6\MOC0002.xml
`
`GOODS AND SERVICES SECTION
`
`NICE CLASS NUMBER
`
`LIMITED LIST
`
`01
`
`List limited to
`
`GOODS AND SERVICE TERMS IN ORIGINAL
`LANGUAGE
`
`Mammalian cell cultures and vectors, being independent replicating pieces of DNA
`that can transfer DNA sequences, each for manufacture and development in the
`biotechnology industries
`
`NICE CLASS NUMBER
`
`LIMITED LIST
`
`40
`
`List limited to
`
`GOODS AND SERVICE TERMS IN ORIGINAL
`LANGUAGE
`
`INSTRUCTIONS SECTION
`
`Processing and manufacturing of vectors, cell cultures and recombinant proteins for
`use in biotechnology industries to the order and specification of others; manufacture,
`processing and production of recombinant proteins for use in the biotechnology
`industries to the order and specification of others
`
`FREE TEXT PROCESSING INSTRUCTIONS
`
`U. S. designated on 20180712; Non-final examiner action
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`01/12/2019
`
` 
` 
`

`

`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
`OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
`
`*79245971*
`
`CLICK HERE TO RESPOND TO THIS
`LETTER:
`http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp
`
`   
`
`U.S. APPLICATION
`SERIAL NO.   79245971
`
`           
`
`MARK: SATURN
`
`CORRESPONDENT
`ADDRESS:
`  
`       Christopher Revell
`  
`       FUJIFILM Diosynth
`Biotechnologies
`         UK Limited,
`           MANCHESTER M2
`7HA
`    
`    UNITED KINGDOM
`APPLICANT:
`FUJIFILM Diosynth
`Biotechnologies UK Lim
`ETC.
`
`CORRESPONDENT’S
`REFERENCE/DOCKET
`
`    
`   
`
`NO:       
`
`  N/A
`CORRESPONDENT E-
`
`MAIL ADDRESS:       
`
`OFFICE ACTION
`
`INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION NO. 1435634
`
`STRICT DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO THIS NOTIFICATION:  TO AVOID PARTIAL ABANDONMENT OF THE REQUEST FOR
`EXTENSION OF PROTECTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION, THE USPTO MUST RECEIVE A COMPLETE RESPONSE
`TO THIS PROVISIONAL PARTIAL REFUSAL NOTIFICATION WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF THE “DATE ON WHICH THE
`NOTIFICATION WAS SENT TO WIPO (MAILING DATE)” LOCATED ON THE WIPO COVER LETTER ACCOMPANYING THIS
`NOTIFICATION.
`
`In addition to the Mailing Date appearing on the WIPO cover letter, a holder (hereafter “applicant”) may confirm this Mailing Date using the
`USPTO’s Trademark Status and Document Retrieval (TSDR) system at http://tsdr.uspto.gov/.  To do so, enter the U.S. application serial number
`for this application and then select “Documents.”   The Mailing Date used to calculate the response deadline for this provisional partial refusal is
`the “Create/Mail Date” of the “IB-1rst Refusal Note.”
`
`This is a PROVISIONAL PARTIAL REFUSAL of the request for extension of protection of the mark in the above-referenced U.S. application
`
`that applies to only the following goods and services in the application:  
`
`Class 01: Cell cultures used in industry and science
`
`Class 42: Scientific, industrial and technical research, development and analysis services relating to the use of mammalian cell cultures
`and vectors in the field of biotechnology; process development, namely, development of processes for the use of mammalian cell cultures
`and vectors in the manufacture of biotechnology products; project studies relating to the use of mammalian cell cultures and vectors in
`the field of biotechnology
`
`See 15 U.S.C. §1141h(c).  See below in this notification (hereafter “Office action”) for details regarding the provisional partial refusal.
`
`The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney.  Applicant must respond timely and completely to
`
` 
` 
` 
`  
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`

`

`the issues below.  15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.
`
`SUMMARY OF ISSUES
`
`Section 2(d) Refusal – Likelihood of Confusion
`Prior-Filed Application Advisory
`Identification of Goods and Services
`
`THIS PARTIAL REFUSAL APPLIES TO CLASS 42 ONLY
`
`SECTION 2(d) REFUSAL – LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION
`
`Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the marks in U.S. Registration Nos. 5439046 and
`5439047.  Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the attached registrations.
`
`For the reasons discussed below, the examining attorney concludes that confusion as to the source or sponsorship is likely between applicant’s
`mark “SATURN” and registrant’s marks “SATIRN” .
`
`Trademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration of an applied-for mark that is so similar to a registered mark that it is likely consumers would be
`confused, mistaken, or deceived as to the commercial source of the goods and/or services of the parties.  See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).  Likelihood of
`confusion is determined on a case-by-case basis by applying the factors set forth in In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 1361,
`177 USPQ 563, 567 (C.C.P.A. 1973) (called the “ du Pont factors”).   In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1322, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1747
`(Fed. Cir. 2017).  Only those factors that are “relevant and of record” need be considered.   M2 Software, Inc. v. M2 Commc’ns, Inc. , 450
`F.3d 1378, 1382, 78 USPQ2d 1944, 1947 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (citing Shen Mfg. Co. v. Ritz Hotel Ltd., 393 F.3d 1238, 1241, 73 USPQ2d
`
`1350, 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2004)); see In re Inn at St. John’s, LLC , 126 USPQ2d 1742, 1744 (TTAB 2018).  
`
`Although not all du Pont factors may be relevant, there are generally two key considerations in any likelihood of confusion analysis:  (1) the
`similarities between the compared marks and (2) the relatedness of the compared services.  See In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d at 1322, 123
`USPQ2d at 1747 (quoting Herbko Int’l, Inc. v. Kappa Books, Inc. , 308 F.3d 1156, 1164-65, 64 USPQ2d 1375, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2002));
`Federated Foods, Inc. v. Fort Howard Paper Co., 544 F.2d 1098, 1103, 192 USPQ 24, 29 (C.C.P.A. 1976) (“The fundamental inquiry mandated
`by [Section] 2(d) goes to the cumulative effect of differences in the essential characteristics of the [services] and differences in the marks.”);
`TMEP §1207.01.
`
`Similarity of the Marks
`
`The applied-for mark is “SATURN” in standard characters.   The registered marks, owned by the same registrant are “SATIRN” (Registration
`No. 5439046) and “SATIRN” with a design element (Registration No. 5439047).
`
`Marks are compared in their entireties for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression.  Stone Lion Capital
`Partners, LP v. Lion Capital LLP, 746 F.3d 1317, 1321, 110 USPQ2d 1157, 1160 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (quoting Palm Bay Imps., Inc. v. Veuve
`Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee En 1772, 396 F.3d 1369, 1371, 73 USPQ2d 1689, 1691 (Fed. Cir. 2005)); TMEP §1207.01(b)-(b)(v). 
`“Similarity in any one of these elements may be sufficient to find the marks confusingly similar.”   In re Inn at St. John’s, LLC , 126 USPQ2d
`1742, 1746 (TTAB 2018) (citing In re Davia, 110 USPQ2d 1810, 1812 (TTAB 2014)); TMEP §1207.01(b).
`
`In this case, the applied-for mark and registered marks are essentially phonetic equivalents notwithstanding the single letter difference.  Slight
`differences in the sound of similar marks will not avoid a likelihood of confusion.  In re Energy Telecomm. & Elec. Ass’n , 222 USPQ 350, 351
`(TTAB 1983); see In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1367, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1912 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
`
`The design element in the registered mark (Registration No. 5439047) does not obviate the likelihood of confusion.   When evaluating a
`composite mark consisting of words and a design, the word portion is normally accorded greater weight because it is likely to make a greater
`impression upon purchasers, be remembered by them, and be used by them to refer to or request the services.  In re Aquitaine Wine USA, LLC,
`126 USPQ2d 1181, 1184 (TTAB 2018) (citing In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012)); TMEP
`§1207.01(c)(ii).  Thus, although marks must be compared in their entireties, the word portion is often considered the dominant feature and is
`accorded greater weight in determining whether marks are confusingly similar.  In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d at 1366-67, 101 USPQ2d at 1911
`(citing Giant Food, Inc. v. Nation’s Foodservice, Inc. , 710 F.2d 1565, 1570-71, 218 USPQ2d 390, 395 (Fed. Cir. 1983)).
`
`In summary, the marks create a substantially similar overall commercial impression because they contain the phonetic equivalent terms
`“SATURN” and “SATIRN”.
`  As a result, the marks are confusingly similar.
`
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`

`

`Similarity of the Services
`
`Applicant’s services are identified as “Scientific, industrial and technical research, development and analysis services relating to the use of
`mammalian cell cultures and vectors in the field of biotechnology; process development, namely, development of processes for the use of
`mammalian cell cultures and vectors in the manufacture of biotechnology products; project studies relating to the use of mammalian cell cultures
`and vectors in the field of biotechnology” in Class 42.
`
`Registrant’s services are identified as “Research and development of vaccines and medicines” in Class 42.
`
`Determining likelihood of confusion is based on the description of the services stated in the application and registration at issue, not on extrinsic
`evidence of actual use.  See In re Detroit Athletic Co., 903 F.3d 1297, 1307, 128 USPQ2d 1047, 1052 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (citing In re
`
`i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1325, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1749 (Fed. Cir. 2017)).   
`
`In this case, the application uses broad wording to describe the services (Scientific, industrial and technical research, development and analysis
`services relating to the use of mammalian cell cultures and vectors in the field of biotechnology; process development, namely, development of
`processes for the use of mammalian cell cultures and vectors in the manufacture of biotechnology products; project studies relating to the use of
`mammalian cell cultures and vectors in the field of biotechnology), which presumably encompasses all services of the type described, including
`registrant’s more narrow identification ( Research and development of vaccines and medicines).  See, e.g., In re Solid State Design Inc., 125
`USPQ2d 1409, 1412-15 (TTAB 2018); Sw. Mgmt., Inc. v. Ocinomled, Ltd., 115 USPQ2d 1007, 1025 (TTAB 2015).  Thus, applicant’s and
`registrant’s services are legally identical.   See, e.g., In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 127 USPQ2d 1627, 1629 (TTAB 2018) (citing Tuxedo Monopoly,
`Inc. v.Gen. Mills Fun Grp., Inc., 648 F.2d 1335, 1336, 209 USPQ 986, 988 (C.C.P.A. 1981); Inter IKEA Sys. B.V. v. Akea, LLC, 110 USPQ2d
`1734, 1745 (TTAB 2014); Baseball Am. Inc. v. Powerplay Sports Ltd., 71 USPQ2d 1844, 1847 n.9 (TTAB 2004)).
`
`Furthermore, the compared services need not be identical or even competitive to find a likelihood of confusion.  See On-line Careline Inc. v. Am.
`Online Inc., 229 F.3d 1080, 1086, 56 USPQ2d 1471, 1475 (Fed. Cir. 2000); Recot, Inc. v. Becton, 214 F.3d 1322, 1329, 54 USPQ2d 1894, 1898
`(Fed. Cir. 2000); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i).  They need only be “related in some manner and/or if the circumstances surrounding their marketing are
`such that they could give rise to the mistaken belief that [the services] emanate from the same source.”   Coach Servs., Inc. v. Triumph Learning
`LLC, 668 F.3d 1356, 1369, 101 USPQ2d 1713, 1722 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting 7-Eleven Inc. v. Wechsler, 83 USPQ2d 1715, 1724 (TTAB 2007));
`TMEP §1207.01(a)(i).
`
`The attached Internet evidence establishes that the relevant services are sold or provided through the same trade channels and used by the same
`classes of consumers in the same fields of use – specifically, it establishes that biotechnology research and development could encompass
`research and development of vaccines and medicines.  Thus, applicant’s and registrant’s services are considered related for likelihood of
`confusion purposes.  See, e.g., In re Davey Prods. Pty Ltd., 92 USPQ2d 1198, 1202-04 (TTAB 2009); In re Toshiba Med. Sys. Corp., 91 USPQ2d
`1266, 1268-69, 1271-72 (TTAB 2009).  For example:
`
`www.omicsonline.org/open-access/role-of-biotechnology-in-improving-human-
`At
`health-2155-9929-1000309.php?aid=82443&view=mobile, “ Biotechnology has offered modern medical devices for diagnostic and
`preventive purposes, which include diagnostic test kits, vaccines and radio-labeled biological therapeutics used for imaging and analysis.”
`At www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168165604003025, “The recent development of powerful biotechnological tools applied
`to genome-based approaches has revolutionized vaccine development, biological research and clinical diagnostics.”
`At www.jstor.org/stable/4454924?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents, “New developments in biotechnology have led to a number of new
`approaches for the development of vaccines aimed at preventing infectious disease.”
`At www.youthkiawaaz.com/2011/03/biotechnology-in-medicine-revolutionizing-lives-of-people/, “The use of biotechnology in the area of
`medicine is also known as red biotechnology.”
`At www.biotechnology.amgen.com/developing-biotech-medicines.html, biotechnology is in assisting scientists to identify the best targets
`for new medicine.
`
`Additionally, the services of the parties have no restrictions as to nature, type, channels of trade, or classes of purchasers and are “presumed to
`travel in the same channels of trade to the same class of purchasers.”   In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed.
`Cir. 2012) (quoting Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Packard Press, Inc., 281 F.3d 1261, 1268, 62 USPQ2d 1001, 1005 (Fed. Cir. 2002)).  Thus,
`applicant’s and registrant’s services are related.
`
`  Therefore, consumers
`In summary, the applicant’s and registrant’s marks create the same commercial impression and identify related services.
`are likely to be confused and mistakenly believe that these services originate from a common source. Accordingly, registration must be refused
`under section 2(d) of the Trademark Act.
`
`PRIOR-FILED APPLICATION ADVISORY
`
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`

`

`The filing date of pending U.S. Application Serial No. 87704420 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 between the two marks.  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 applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal by submitting evidence and arguments in support
`of registration.  However, if applicant responds to the refusal, applicant must also respond to the requirement set forth below.
`
`THIS PARTIAL REQUIREMENT APPLIES ONLY TO THE GOODS AND SERVICES SPECIFIED THEREIN
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS AND SERVICES
`
`Class 01
`
`The wording “industry” and “development” in the identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified because it does not make clear the
`
`purpose of the goods.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01.  
`
`Class 42
`
`The wording “process development, namely, development of processes for the use of mammalian cell cultures and vectors in the manufacture of
`biotechnology products” in the identification of services is indefinite and must be clarified because it does not make clear the nature of the
`services.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01.  A process or system is only a way of doing something, and is not generally a service. 
`TMEP §1301.02(e).  An applied-for mark that identifies only a process, style, method, or system is therefore not registrable as a service mark.  
`
`In
`
`re HSB Solomon Assocs., LLC, 102 USPQ2d at 1270;  In re Hughes Aircraft Co., 222 USPQ 263, 264 (TTAB 1984).  
`
`The wording “project studies relating to the use of mammalian cell cultures and vectors in the field of biotechnology” in the identification of
`
`services is indefinite and must be clarified because does not make clear the nature of the services.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01.  
`Applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate (examining attorney’s suggestions (examining attorney’s suggestions in bold font):  
`
`Class 01: Chemicals for use in biotechnological manufacturing processes, namely, cell cultures used in science; Chemicals for use in
`biotechnological manufacturing processes, namely,   mammalian cell cultures and vectors, being independent replicating pieces of DNA that
`can transfer DNA sequences
`
`Class 40: Processing and manufacturing of vectors, cell cultures and recombinant proteins for use in biotechnology industries to the order and
`specification of others; manufacture, processing and production of recombinant proteins for use in the biotechnology industries to the order and
`specification of others
`
`Class 42: Scientific, industrial and technical research, development and analysis services relating to the use of mammalian cell cultures and
`vectors in the field of biotechnology; Scientific project studies relating to the use of mammalian cell cultures and vectors in the field of
`biotechnology
`
`Applicant may amend the identification to clarify or limit the goods and/or services, but not to broaden or expand the goods and/or services
`beyond those in the original application or as acceptably amended.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06.  Generally, any deleted goods
`and/or services may not later be reinserted.  See TMEP §1402.07(e).  Additionally, for applications filed under Trademark Act Section 66(a), the
`scope of the identification for purposes of permissible amendments is limited by the international class assigned by the International Bureau of
`the World Intellectual Property Organization (International Bureau); and the classification of goods and/or services may not be changed from that
`assigned by the International Bureau.  37 C.F.R. §2.85(d); TMEP §§1401.03(d), 1904.02(b).  Further, in a multiple-class Section 66(a)
`application, classes may not be added or goods and/or services transferred from one existing class to another.  37 C.F.R. §2.85(d); TMEP
`§1401.03(d).
`
`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.
`
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`

`

`RESPONSE GUIDELINES
`
`For this application to proceed further, applicant must explicitly address each refusal and/or requirement in this Office action.  For a refusal,
`applicant may provide written arguments and evidence against the refusal, and may have other response options if specified above.  For a
`requirement, applicant should set forth the changes or statements.  Please see “ Responding to Office Actions” and the informational video
`“Response to Office Action ” for more information and tips on responding.
`
`FAILING TO RESPOND WILL RESULT IN PARTIAL ABANDONMENT OF APPLICATION:  If applicant does not respond to this
`Office action within the six-month period for response, the goods and services in International Class International Classes 01 and 42 identified
`
`above, in the beginning of this Office action, will be deleted from the application.  
`
`In such case, the application will then proceed only with the following goods and services:
`
`Class 01: mammalian cell cultures and vectors, being independent replicating pieces of DNA that can transfer DNA sequences, each for
`manufacture and development in the biotechnology industries
`
`Class 40: Scientific, industrial and technical research, development and analysis services relating to the use of mammalian cell cultures and
`vectors in the field of biotechnology; process development, namely, development of processes for the use of mammalian cell cultures and vectors
`in the manufacture of biotechnology products; project studies relating to the use of mammalian cell cultures and vectors in the field of
`biotechnology
`
`See 37 C.F.R. §2.65(a)-(a)(1); TMEP §718.02(a).
`
`WHO IS PERMITTED TO RESPOND TO THIS PROVISIONAL PARTIAL REFUSAL:  Any response to this provisional refusal must be
`personally signed by an individual applicant, all joint applicants, or someone with legal authority to bind a juristic applicant (e.g., a corporate
`officer or general partner).  37 C.F.R. §§2.62(b), 2.193(e)(2)(ii); TMEP §712.01.  If applicant hires a qualified U.S. attorney to respond on his or
`her behalf, then the attorney must sign the response.  37 C.F.R. §§2.193(e)(2)(i), 11.18(a); TMEP §§611.03(b), 712.01.  Qualified U.S. attorneys
`include those in good standing with a bar of the highest court of any U.S. state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and other U.S.
`commonwealths or U.S. territories.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.17(a), 2.62(b), 11.1, 11.14(a); TMEP §§602, 712.01.  Additionally, for all responses, the
`proper signatory must personally sign the document or personally enter his or her electronic signature on the electronic filing.  See 37 C.F.R.
`§2.193(a); TMEP §§611.01(b), 611.02.  The name of the signatory must also be printed or typed immediately below or adjacent to the signature,
`or identified elsewhere in the filing.  37 C.F.R. §2.193(d); TMEP §611.01(b).
`
`In general, foreign attorneys are not permitted to represent applicants before the USPTO (e.g., file written communications, authorize an
`amendment to an application, or submit legal arguments in response to a requirement or refusal).  See 37 C.F.R. §11.14(c), (e); TMEP §§602.03-
`
`.03(b), 608.01.  
`
`DESIGNATION OF DOMESTIC REPRESENTATIVE:  The USPTO encourages applicants who do not reside in the United States to
`designate a domestic representative upon whom any notice or process may be served.  TMEP §610; see 15 U.S.C. §§1051(e), 1141h(d); 37
`
`C.F.R. §2.24(a)(1)-(2).  Such designations may be filed online at http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/correspondence.jsp.     
`
`/Katrina J. Goodwin/
`Examining Attorney
`Law Office 122
`571-272-7605
`Katrina.Goodwin@uspto.gov
`
`TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER:   Go to http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp.   Please wait 48-72 hours from the
`issue/mailing date before using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), to allow for necessary system updates of the application. 
`For technical assistance with online forms, e-mail TEAS@uspto.gov.  For questions about the Office action itself, please contact the assigned
`trademark examining attorney.  E-mail communications will not be accepted as responses to Office actions; therefore, do not respond to
`this Office action by e-mail.
`
`All informal e-mail communications relevant to this application will be placed in the official application record.
`
`WHO MUST SIGN THE RESPONSE:  It must be personally signed by an individual applicant or someone with legal authority to bind an
`
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`

`

`applicant (i.e., a corporate officer, a general partner, all joint applicants).  If an applicant is represented by an attorney, the attorney must sign the
`
`response.  
`
`PERIODICALLY CHECK THE STATUS OF THE APPLICATION:   To ensure that applicant does not miss crucial deadlines or official
`notices, check the status of the application every three to four months using the Trademark Status and Document Retrieval (TSDR) system at
`http://tsdr.uspto.gov/.   Please keep a copy of the TSDR status screen.   If the status shows no change for more than six months, contact the
`Trademark Assistance Center by e-mail at TrademarkAssistanceCenter@uspto.gov or call 1-800-786-9199.   For more information on checking
`status, see http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/process/status/.
`
`TO UPDATE CORRESPONDENCE/E-MAIL ADDRESS:  Use the TEAS form at http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/correspondence.jsp.
`
` 
`  
`

`

`5
`
`429::JEI'M‘1-‘2h2313
`x '-
`-.o|:~c-rsu-.eancicr,-.ur
`
`
`
`G‘ olirj
`
`
`E) Hl'lFlul n2:
`:55 up a urnsrmnm-‘u _
`
`h
`l-‘I'n'llvfi-'In1'|i.'-
`Ir
`Abstract
`I
`r‘
`IInycllfin' n'
`
`
`
`rannmn-k l'
`
`
`-lurn. n |1c':|l|1 Is .1 rr .
`
`
`Iherldwle'u because 0! Irllecuo _ lls
`es. 3Ic. c hneiogy has played a dyrlan'uc rele Inlmprdulr'g Iheehullengus rcgardlng UL"
`human health as It has f|I=r>cILs|II'\_.I to reduce global healdn {ll-“ererces lwthe :TII'Da’lfiIC-n anren-Islnc; teshl‘olegles. Health. ilfe
`eualix and Expos: :nnq- 0|
`|ih-. have been memorial! 'Marlduidn IJ'rnugh ll"? semen-.2: provided by bluleelIn-taloqy. MalrJII-ilio"
`n'uinlyarises due 2-: Ille lack cl essential nLItrienls and vilnmins in loud and ulLimuLely results in death. BIULc'flInulegy l'as
`ploya rr'ajorrolc In ellwlnatll'g these problems by proc'Lclng nutnems cnrlchcd food such as Eic-lden Ftlcc. Mnlze. pototc and
`sagd'pean .' ' IIIoreclInolog-r has also played an Importanr role Ir cnntnelllng the enulrcnmencal pollutlol‘ through
`
`
`bindegrolialln-‘t r.' Ixalnrl
`"
`[lullmanlr ‘l
`:
`r
`.
`'n‘m Watches irrlplrcwernenl <>| l'ur-.::n l'<:.1th Ily‘ Ihe Inc: M bio-Inellnnlugnstl
`
`
`advances -n molecular diug'osljes l11L'LilE.l|1L‘.'n’I.h.ll'lL—'. IILILI'lLlQIIE'Ill'f erlnched geneLieaill}.I modified crops one VI'EIBIE‘
`rranagement.
`
`I
`
`Recommended JOLII'HEIE
`
`l-(EllJllt' R \lnl::I:II:-_' \l
`
`JlLI‘I'IE:
`
` 1T
`
`I
`
`,
`L'I'EOITm' g; f;a1cérf;g§g {soc-1s
`
`.I-.n-nr=
`LL 1: LBI'IZEIl UaEl’DEIE 5:
`
`m... r...
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Keywo rds
`BlUlLti'll'lUliJgj'T Human i'IE‘éJlLlli '[nicvcliuns diseases: Molecular Llingr'usis; VuLcires: Bugs
`-
`Introd uctlon
`BImH‘I‘.ne!ogycnnnIn-Ines mucn rewards [he gromng DIIDIH’ and gland healtr needsJ‘I has reuemnonlyen nanIc-nrl
`'nce Irs
`
`exich'rIce. [I pruudcs eilc'cliue diagnostics. pr we‘tlion und IrealmenLrreas.lresinL|LIcinc_1 pruduclien oi revel crugs nne
`
`rucunILIInnnL vacclnes III. .L glues cfl'ecleI: drug dellwryappma‘dtes. new Vet-ode [or LIIL‘rapeuLIcs. nnulue-
`'Illjr' e'tnslled
`gsneclcall'g- Innd Ifled fronts and effluent n'nerl'ods. ‘or swaronrrencal cleanup. I ealth. IIfe qualtyand emenanrv oFIIfe have
`
`.:u
`
`
`lat-9n increase-d 'mJIIJI-vice- Lhmunh Ille ‘o-r'vicL-ri [Hm-idler. lI-I' llic:.r~::hn<:l:3!;y [3‘ 1]. Faratili: anl: inl.
`ases like
`_ .Tl'slI have been clagnusue rapidl
`reauvely Inn.I Lost.
`ALqu red ImI .
`.UdL‘llL‘lL‘l'C,’ Synnrdr'vc [EDS] [at L] and lulx‘chHe-
`
`
`
`Molozulnr dlognosoc tools Includlrg polymerase :haln I'cocdon [PCIll |'-'|. moorv‘hlnarecntlgcns and monoclonal nntIh-odles
`hive been used for I‘hls purpose. Itlctechnolog'; has fof-l'f—(l modern dlagl‘osnr test kIts. rlcket‘tslal. hasrerld and mrai
`U.J|:I:ir:~.-:l-:M!dir' lac !.In:)|| Fm. pnlio
`-.-:
`'in
`nrlg'mlllllfldit
`IndI::JIo-gitall'mrupcmli
`nrimngnlglunddr.‘
`
`
`
`
`
`urn all-er dc 'ljtilS IsL's Eur U'e lasl hundred years. BioLeelmelogy has made auxinncerrlenI.= in unccinatidn b1.- n'aking
`recomblnant vacclnes that hauethe potentlal to erectlcets non-communlcabl-e :llseeses l!l'.e cancer |5.9|. Na‘ktec- L1N!.ua:c|nes,
`s'lral venmruacclnes [In] and plant-denser] vacslnes -_I IJ_I are found m be most effect .-e agalnst a number eft'aererlal and
`vira! disorders [12:].
`
`Tl'ewpeulic pmluir: have a large Irlluerse on non Lelnlrunie' :Ee disL '
`'5 Iespensilcle ldr over [airs oi deaths ir' developing
`
`eeur'Jies [15']. Transgenic buLeria, wash. plants [2.14] and Inumrr'als I” 5] have bixfll used il'
`nclur':l el recur-bind“:
`therapeuflc prorelm. New oeslreclgenes are Introduced Into these syster's topmduce d'terapeunvr. erotelr‘rs nflnreresr In
`larqe quanr'tles ant: are then on nfieo ['5]. I he most IlflFCl’lal‘T 'ecerhlnanttherapemr pmtel ns Include er'fihroooleon for
`
` Juid=024433rxiw=nlebls
`
`I
`I
`
`
`
`, Molecular; care-J; mam-e
`Jzu'ns;
`, Pavarcac. In '\Iole:uI5' J:conost|cs
`.I:u'n§5
`'.:.In.mn-.
`ni::||>c_|:.-.un:l.-'
`.
`p were: Honearrq JOl Tol
`
`
`I
`
`”"m'ml" """ ‘-
`
`
`
`mule T ”3
`..
`l-szp-nrl mic-or
`’ “9'93”: 7'1'5 9""9
`
`
`
`

`

`4:223)? I'M “enema
`
`
`If F .Iolcotiloiclcv arauazc
`at
`
`vmntit-rn J x lirai l.: irrint -."nil
`l‘l_l[! c- |
`Hit hHhD‘lI III EL: '1
`
`
`GOIIH
`G. {inrglr .nm-n-rr. h."flaps I Irmrmnm-‘unsrtinEEi n E- umgr eran—n my 9 Hripiui nb: Q iiwm irannmnci:
`E |r::t( rnpa-ucm :
`
`
`
`ll lllrfllnnm'trriglmy
`’ us lo:|rtrrt|’h'.flmo
`E. anmcr
`I
`Signin } ® 19‘
`
`
`
`JournalsfitBocks
`
`Register
`i_—.r“
`96
`5“ m a M'JuiiLaL'
`
`ScienceDirect
`
`Outline
`abstract
`HEW-BUS
`1
`llll'l Itiic 'Kllt-
`
`
`3ch “new: Iims'si' cwcimlugy
`'3'
`(“Air-vi. Ilium! 'ir.
`'
`3. HBVGI'SE 'I'JEII'IODWMDIBG ho fileJ U \‘BI'IIHDGCZOHLIE
`". D'Nlr'JlliLllflJlIIf In. Law
` 5 lim.
`icm lll uirir
`J
`19'-
`
` .Ivnmri. i
`.'. Lion'psrmme cemme—proleame technologies
`J'I
`f‘xii
`
`
`Helm
`
`
`
`Figures (3]
`
`Tables [2]
`55 Ian'-
`93 THJIL-E
`
`Part orspscial issue:
`
`Highlights from the E43511: Building
`Bricgee between Biosciencee and
`Bioengineering
`L'IZ led D'f IJ. \Ofl Smiml' an: .5.
`
`l’-JEfil5l'
`
`I Download full issue
`Other articles from this issue
`
`A
`
`:-'-CI
`
`mam EEllB Bllfl pancreas": MIHW 'fl \‘Jll'fl
`..nulml c1 H'N-nr.h1fl4'h]5'_'<‘fi1ll"‘lr.‘ 11:: Issues 1
`2*.
`'5 Download I
`'U
`new details v
`Gena-nice for Food safety anal sustainable animal ..
`
`:s l ."- FJJ
`..-t:IJI|Hl it: rllllfllllVIIt-itugf ‘e'iSIJ‘ii‘ :1. .
`‘dimtlmih v
`'|_'.
`I'IIM'-'IIIMIl PH:
`Experience {um Liam hers-I arc-d Hlmid spa”
`c'JUITPJl Q'- E=C¢9In10mv “ELF-‘19 113. ISSUES 1-3 3U
`fl
`I'IIM"IIIMI|P'n: Wins-cinlnih- v
`
`‘u'xm IIKIIEE mli:
`
`Recommended articles
`
`Citing arlicles (35]
`
`Article Metrics
`rm M
`
`v
`
`v
`
`A.
`New 9
`
`~
`
`snare
`
`Export
`
`Journal of Biotechnology
`Nut-19113. Ismtfl. 30 Septe'nber SUD-t Page-51532
`
`
`
`.
`
`. !
`.
`\.
`51-3.?FR
`
`
`Ft
`
`f Damion: PDF
`
`Biotechnology and vaccines: application of functional genomics
`to Neisserr'a mentngr‘tr'dr's and other bacterial pathogens
`Ufi‘VIflB SEI'I'LII‘O. JEEI'II'IEHBML- leCIIB HEI'DEIIE UK‘BUJ’II
`IEII'IO lilEDllOllgfi‘J Mfil'BJl'aZlG I'm. M Masons-1|
`El snowmen;
` IH' «will: It: ll‘lu'fl'ENllllt. Foil-t ::.\ Iva
`
`(tel riijiil: mil i:iirl::ril
`
`Abstract
`
`Since its introduction. iracc nology has beer! very effective in breventirtg infectious diseases.
`However.
`in several cases. the co-wentional approach to identify protective antigens. based
`CII'L biochemical. imrrunological and microbiological methods. has ta led to deliver successful
`vaccine cand dates against major bacher al pathogens.
`
`
`The availability cf a. genome
`
`provides an inclusive virtual catalogue of all the potential antigens from which it is possible to
`select the molecubs that a‘e liltelil to be more etTeczi'ue. Here: we describe the use cf
`"reverse vaccinology‘. which has been success"u| in the identification ¢r potennal vaccines
`candidates against. Heissene rareningi'tl'dts serogroup E and review ttie use of functional
`genomics approaches as DNA microarrays. proteom ics anc comparative gencme analysis
`for the identification of virulence Factors and novel vaccine candida:es. In addition= we
`describe the potential of these powerful technologies in understanding the aathogenesis or
`various bacéeria
`
` Illuamen-:1.
`
`iLwLLum'ucMiue'hilir.
`
`
`filfifll-ESEMSOME
`
`
`
`

`

`'MH-'2 21113
`
`
`
`
`
` : Irannmnnc l'
`E anmcr
`E limljr hmn'fi rm;
`® i-u-Iplul
`rm: 0 ||
`Q llh roan ram-mm
`a lllrfllr‘nlu 4mm}
`Nam-u m-
`Know—m ”pm-wt u 'm- m. ||.sL'I-r|.|:~4un'
`:Iwhmumu|w—Mnuuwmmw-
`Iwnnw
`
`
`|r::t(r.r1|1:ncn1
`
`
`1 I
`.1 m n-m- 1
`
`Irmfi'lfl
`Hy'llmTIIJ'I {I'-
`
`|"IC Uficlctncrta l1
`
`
`
`¢ Pn'."=n.|'. mm | manual-13
`I'rn
`mum-.-nn;m.1r.|n.-1.1a-1!c¢
`
`Ste Ihla Item
`
` .m-i =. v. w.
`
`m
`
`WHWVW
`
`Haltnln 5:“le I—m'rxrs. 2mm: u
`Ir-Imln r? Hmml! r. varrlrr‘r- Hrmr ns. 31123.1";
`'j-
`.
`
`Gunman-w
`
`Abstfil I::t
`
`W.dm'eluprranh— i" bimem'dcgy haw
`Ian I: a numercfheur-appmaches 1m me
`develoame'n: muacalnea Emea at
`Freuerding infectious Disease Thisrspurt
`sm'rnarzas acme aft-Is primiplas
`undmyflg Irese new be: "Adages and
`Illus'natee some applacafinn: nrmese
`tacl'nulugia-s he practical man-'5
`da'mlwmant.
`
`WW thdlI-Dlogy RM Il Wk! Wu
`HEM-Endbhmlfih-L
`
`Dmlmm
`Wmm'flu‘mfimwmw
`f-WWWM Mb.w
`wurMh-unmhqrmmmw
`
`{wwwmmmmmw
`mulli od' ITI lio'blir pmdncu. Slallpm rm
`
`ham ”rum-.1 .
`inn HI win-inn Jun-u
`mum. “let. anln. and minus om"
`”Inhmmofumurimmdlnem lupin:
`althwammhnwmsflmhmmfliurfi
`Rx nnmmwnmmwm new
`line “ulna. m wlm hound-1 pan-dun
`“wmmimfmwm hum:
`WM maxim hwanly aqua- w I: - ru