To:
`
`Subject:
`
`Sent:
`
`Sent As:
`
`Attachments:
`
`IEH Auto Parts LLC (daniel.daniele@nortonrosefulbright.com)
`
`U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 86652868 - AUTO PLUS AUTO PARTS - N/A
`
`9/17/2015 2:07:37 PM
`
`ECOM107@USPTO.GOV
`
`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
`Attachment - 14
`Attachment - 15
`Attachment - 16
`Attachment - 17
`Attachment - 18
`Attachment - 19
`Attachment - 20
`Attachment - 21
`Attachment - 22
`Attachment - 23
`Attachment - 24
`Attachment - 25
`Attachment - 26
`Attachment - 27
`Attachment - 28
`Attachment - 29
`Attachment - 30
`Attachment - 31
`Attachment - 32
`Attachment - 33
`Attachment - 34
`Attachment - 35
`Attachment - 36
`Attachment - 37
`Attachment - 38
`Attachment - 39
`Attachment - 40
`Attachment - 41
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
`OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
`
`(cid:160)
`

`

`U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. (cid:160) 86652868
`
`(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160)M
`
`ARK: AUTO PLUS AUTO PARTS
`
`CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS:
`(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160) (cid:160) (cid:160) DANIEL DANIELE; NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT
`CA
`(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160) (cid:160) (cid:160) ROYAL BANK PLAZA, S; 200 BAY STREET, SUI
`(cid:160) (cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) TORONTO, ONTARIO
`(cid:160) (cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160) (cid:160) (cid:160) M5J2Z4
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160) (cid:160) CANADA
`APPLICANT: IEH Auto Parts LLC
`
`(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET
`
`*86652868*
`
`(cid:160)C
`
`LICK HERE TO RESPOND TO THIS
`LETTER:
`http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp
`
`VIEW YOUR APPLICATION FILE
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160) N/A
`
`NO:(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS:(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`daniel.daniele@nortonrosefulbright.com
`
`OFFICE ACTION
`
`STRICT DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER
`TO AVOID ABANDONMENT OF APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION, THE USPTO MUST RECEIVE APPLICANT’S
`COMPLETE RESPONSE TO THIS LETTER WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF THE ISSUE/MAILING DATE BELOW.
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`SSUE/MAILING DATE: 9/17/2015
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney.(cid:160) Applicant must respond timely and completely to
`the issue(s) below.(cid:160) 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.
`
`SUMMARY OF ISSUES that applicant must address:
`
`(cid:160)-
`
` Refusal – Likelihood of Confusion
`- Disclaimer Requirement
`- Entity Indefinite – Clarification Required
`- Foreign Attorney May Not Represent Applicant - Advisory
`
`(cid:160)R
`
`efusal – Likelihood of Confusion
`
`(cid:160)R
`
`egistration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the marks in U.S. Registrations Nos. 3356868 (“US
`AUTO PLUS”),(cid:160)3337907 (“US UNI-SELECT AUTO PLUS”),(cid:160)3813995 (“AUTO SERVICE PLUS US”),(cid:160)4308092(cid:160)(“US AUTO PLUS UNI-
`SELECT”) and 4327328 (“US AUTO PLUS”). (cid:160) Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.(cid:160) See the
`enclosed registrations.
`
`Trademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration of an applied-for mark that so resembles a registered mark that it is likely a potential consumer
`would be confused, mistaken, or deceived as to the source of the goods and/or services of the applicant and registrant.(cid:160) See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).(cid:160)
`A determination of likelihood of confusion under Section 2(d) is made on a case-by case basis and 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) aid in this determination.(cid:160) Citigroup Inc. v. Capital City Bank Grp.,
`Inc., 637 F.3d 1344, 1349, 98 USPQ2d 1253, 1256 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (citing On-Line Careline, Inc. v. Am. Online, Inc., 229 F.3d 1080, 1085, 56
`USPQ2d 1471, 1474 (Fed. Cir. 2000)).(cid:160) Not all the du Pont factors, however, are necessarily relevant or of equal weight, and any one of the
`factors may control in a given case, depending upon the evidence of record.(cid:160) Citigroup Inc. v. Capital City Bank Grp., Inc., 637 F.3d at 1355, 98
`USPQ2d at 1260; In re Majestic Distilling Co., 315 F.3d 1311, 1315, 65 USPQ2d 1201, 1204 (Fed. Cir. 2003); see In re E. I. du Pont de
`Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d at 1361-62, 177 USPQ at 567.
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`n this case, the following factors are the most relevant:(cid:160) similarity of the marks, similarity and nature of the goods and/or services, and similarity
`of the trade channels of the goods and/or services.(cid:160) See In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1361-62, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In
`re Dakin’s Miniatures Inc. , 59 USPQ2d 1593, 1595-96 (TTAB 1999); TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.
`
`(cid:160)C
`
`omparison of the Marks
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`n a likelihood of confusion determination, the marks in their entireties are compared for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation, and
`
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`

`

`commercial impression.(cid:160) In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 1361, 177 USPQ 563, 567 (C.C.P.A. 1973); TMEP §1207.01(b)-
`
`(b)(v).(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`When comparing marks, the test is not whether the marks can be distinguished in a side-by-side comparison, but rather whether the marks are
`sufficiently similar in terms of their overall commercial impression that confusion as to the source of the goods and/or services offered under the
`respective marks is likely to result.(cid:160) Midwestern Pet Foods, Inc. v. Societe des Produits Nestle S.A., 685 F.3d 1046, 1053, 103 USPQ2d 1435,
`1440 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Davia, 110 USPQ2d 1810, 1813 (TTAB 2014); TMEP §1207.01(b).(cid:160) The proper focus is on the recollection of the
`average purchaser, who retains a general rather than specific impression of trademarks.(cid:160) United Global Media Grp., Inc. v. Tseng, 112 USPQ2d
`1039, 1049, (TTAB 2014); L’Oreal S.A. v. Marcon , 102 USPQ2d 1434, 1438 (TTAB 2012); TMEP §1207.01(b).
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`n the present case, applicant’s mark comprises “AUTO PLUS” in dominant part and registrant’s mark also comprises “AUTO PLUS” or
`“AUTO SERVICE PLUS” in dominant part.(cid:160) Thus, the marks comprise the identical wording in terms of appearance and sound.(cid:160) In addition,
`the connotation and commercial impression of the marks do not differ when considered in connection with applicant’s and registrant’s
`respective services, as discussed further below.(cid:160) The wording “AUTO PARTS” is highly descriptive for the goods sold in the stores and has
`little to no trademark significance.(cid:160) Consumers will focus on “AUTO PLUS” and therefore this wording is given greater weight in comparing the
`marks.
`
`(cid:160)M
`
`arks must be compared in their entireties and should not be dissected; however, a trademark examining attorney may weigh the individual
`components of a mark to determine its overall commercial impression.(cid:160) Stone Lion Capital Partners, LP v. Lion Capital LLP, 746 F.3d 1317,
`1322, 110 USPQ2d 1157, 1161 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (quoting In re Nat’l Data Corp. , 753 F.2d 1056, 1058, 224 USPQ 749, 751 (Fed. Cir. 1985)
`(“[I]n articulating reasons for reaching a conclusion on the issue of confusion, there is nothing improper in stating that, for rational reasons,
`more or less weight has been given to a particular feature of a mark, provided the ultimate conclusion rests on consideration of the marks in their
`
`entireties.”)). (cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`As for the designs or stylized letters in the registrations, for a composite mark containing both words and a design, the word portion may be
`more likely to be impressed upon a purchaser’s memory and to be used when requesting the goods and/or services. (cid:160) Joel Gott Wines, LLC v.
`Rehoboth Von Gott, Inc., 107 USPQ2d 1424, 1431 (TTAB 2013) (citing In re Dakin’s Miniatures, Inc. , 59 USPQ2d 1593, 1596 (TTAB 1999));
`TMEP §1207.01(c)(ii); see In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908, 1911 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (citing CBS Inc. v. Morrow,
`708 F. 2d 1579, 1581-82, 218 USPQ 198, 200 (Fed. Cir 1983)).(cid:160) Thus, although such 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, even
`where the word portion has been disclaimed.(cid:160) In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d at 1366, 101 USPQ2d at 1911 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (citing Giant Food, Inc.
`
`v. Nation’s Foodservice, Inc. , 710 F.2d 1565, 1570-71, 218 USPQ2d 390, 395 (Fed. Cir. 1983)).(cid:160)(cid:160)
`Therefore, the marks are confusingly similar.(cid:160)(cid:160)
`Comparison of the Services
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he goods and/or services of the parties need not be identical or even competitive to find a likelihood of confusion.(cid:160) 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) (“[E]ven if the goods in question are different from, and thus not related to, one another in kind, the same goods can be
`
`related in the mind of the consuming public as to the origin of the goods.”); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i). (cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`The respective goods and/or services need only be “related in some manner and/or if the circumstances surrounding their marketing [be] such
`that they could give rise to the mistaken belief that [the goods and/or services] emanate from the same source.” (cid:160) 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).
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he applicant’s services are retail, online retail and wholesale store services and distributorships all featuring automotive parts and accessories. (cid:160)
`The registrant’s services in U.S. Registrations Nos. 3356868 (“US AUTO PLUS”),(cid:160)3337907 (“US UNI-SELECT AUTO PLUS”),
`(cid:160) The
`(cid:160)4308092(cid:160)(“US AUTO PLUS UNI-SELECT”) and 4327328 (“US AUTO PLUS”) are “Retail automobile parts and accessories stores”.
`services in Reg. No. 3813995 (“AUTO SERVICE PLUS US”) are installation, repair and mechanic services of automobiles and parts. (cid:160) As for
`the first four registrations, clearly the services are identical.(cid:160) The goods sold in the stores are identical and therefore the consumers and channels
`of trade are identical.
`
`(cid:160)A
`
`s for the auto services in Reg. No. 3813995, these services are typically offered by auto parts and accessories stores and clearly would target
`the same consumers.(cid:160)(cid:160) In this regard, the trademark examining attorney has attached evidence from the USPTO’s X-Search database consisting
`of a number of third-party marks registered for use in connection with the same or similar services as those of both applicant and registrant in
`this case.(cid:160) This evidence shows that the services listed therein, namely, auto parts and accessories stores and auto installation, repair or
`maintenance services, are of a kind that may emanate from a single source under a single mark.(cid:160) See In re Anderson, 101 USPQ2d 1912, 1919
`(TTAB 2012); In re Albert Trostel & Sons Co., 29 USPQ2d 1783, 1785-86 (TTAB 1993); In re Mucky Duck Mustard Co., 6 USPQ2d 1467, 1470
`n.6 (TTAB 1988); TMEP §1207.01(d)(iii).
`
`

`

`(cid:160)I
`
`n this case, the marks are highly similar, comprise identical wording, and the services are identical in part, therefore, consumer confusion as to
`the source of the services is likely.
`
`(cid:160)A
`
`(cid:160)A
`
`ccordingly, registration is refused.
`
`lthough applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusals by submitting evidence and arguments in
`
`support of registration.(cid:160)(cid:160)
`Ownership of Cited Registrations
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`f the mark in the cited application/registration has been assigned to applicant, then applicant must prove ownership of that mark.(cid:160) TMEP
`§812.01.(cid:160) Applicant may record the assignment with the Assignment Services Division of the Office.(cid:160) Trademark Act Section 10, 15 U.S.C.
`§1060; 37 C.F.R. §3.25; TMEP §§503 et seq.(cid:160) Applicant should then notify the trademark examining attorney when the assignment has been
`recorded.
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`n the alternative, applicant may submit evidence of the assignment of the mark to applicant, such as: (1) documents evidencing the chain of
`title; or (2) an explanation of the chain of title (specifying each party in the chain, the nature of each conveyance, and the relevant dates),
`supported by a notarized affidavit or a signed declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20.(cid:160) 37 C.F.R. §3.73; TMEP §502.
`
`(cid:160)G
`
`enerally, the applicant has the burden of proving ownership of an application or registration.(cid:160) The USPTO's automated search system may not
`reflect the recordation of changes of ownership in the Assignment Services Division.(cid:160) Therefore, if an applicant does not assert ownership of a
`pertinent registration in an application when it is filed, it is possible that the registration may be cited as a reference under §2(d) even though it is
`owned by the applicant.(cid:160) If so, the applicant must:(cid:160) (1) state for the record that the documents have been recorded in the Assignment Services
`Division for a registration based on an application under §1 or §44 of the Trademark Act, or with the IB for a registered extension of protection
`of an international registration under §69 of the Trademark Act; (2) submit copies of documents evidencing the chain of title; or (3) submit an
`explanation, supported by an affidavit or declaration under 37 C.F.R. §2.20, of the chain of title (specifying each party in the chain, the nature of
`each conveyance, and the relevant dates).(cid:160) See TMEP §§502 et seq.
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`f applicant responds to the refusals applicant must also respond to the requirements set forth below.
`
`(cid:160)D
`
`isclaimer Requirement
`
`(cid:160)A
`
`pplicant must disclaim the wording “AUTO” and “AUTO PARTS” because it merely describes an feature of applicant’s services, and thus is
`an unregistrable component of the mark.(cid:160) See 15 U.S.C. §§1052(e)(1), 1056(a); DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd., 695 F.3d
`1247, 1251, 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1755 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting In re Oppedahl & Larson LLP, 373 F.3d 1171, 1173, 71 USPQ2d 1370, 1371
`
`(Fed. Cir. 2004)); TMEP §§1213, 1213.03(a).(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160) See attached definition from Collins Dictionary, www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/.(cid:160)
`“Auto” is defined as: “short for automobile”.
`Based on the identification of services, it is clear that “AUTO” and (cid:160) “AUTO PARTS” describes the most salient feature of the services. (cid:160)
`Applicant’s services are auto parts and accessories stores and distributorships.
`
`(cid:160)A
`
`n applicant may not claim exclusive rights to terms that others may need to use to describe their goods and/or services in the marketplace.(cid:160) See
`Dena Corp. v. Belvedere Int’l, Inc. , 950 F.2d 1555, 1560, 21 USPQ2d 1047, 1051 (Fed. Cir. 1991); In re Aug. Storck KG, 218 USPQ 823, 825
`(TTAB 1983).(cid:160) A disclaimer of unregistrable matter does not affect the appearance of the mark; that is, a disclaimer does not physically remove
`the disclaimed matter from the mark.(cid:160) See Schwarzkopf v. John H. Breck, Inc., 340 F.2d 978, 978, 144 USPQ 433, 433 (C.C.P.A. 1965); TMEP
`
`§1213.(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`If applicant does not provide the required disclaimer, the USPTO may refuse to register the entire mark.(cid:160) See In re Stereotaxis Inc., 429 F.3d
`1039, 1040-41, 77 USPQ2d 1087, 1088-89 (Fed. Cir. 2005); TMEP §1213.01(b).
`
`(cid:160)A
`
`pplicant should submit a disclaimer in the following standardized format:
`
`No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “AUTO” and “AUTO PARTS” apart from the mark as shown.
`
`(cid:160)F
`
`or an overview of disclaimers and instructions on how to satisfy this disclaimer requirement online using the Trademark Electronic Application
`System (TEAS) form, please go to http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/law/disclaimer.jsp.
`
`(cid:160)E
`
`ntity Indefinite – Clarification Required
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he designation “LLC” is included in applicant’s name, but the entity type is set forth as a “corporation.” (cid:160) Generally, “LLC” identifies a
`
`(cid:160)
`

`

`“limited liability company,” and not a corporation. (cid:160) Therefore, applicant must specify whether the entity type is a limited liability company or a
`corporation and amend the application accordingly.(cid:160) TMEP §803.03(h).
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`f applicant is a limited liability company, applicant must amend the entity type and provide the U.S. state under whose laws it is organized.(cid:160) Id.(cid:160)
`If applicant is a corporation, applicant must provide the legal name of the corporation and U.S. state or foreign country of incorporation or
`organization.(cid:160) See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(2), (a)(3)(ii); TMEP §§803.02(c), 803.03(c).
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`f, in response to the above request, applicant provides information indicating that it is not the owner of the mark, registration will be refused
`under Trademark Act Section 1 because the application was void as filed.(cid:160) An application must be filed by the owner of the mark.(cid:160) 15 U.S.C.
`§1051; 37 C.F.R. §2.71(d); TMEP §§803.01, 803.06, 1201.02(b).
`
`(cid:160)F
`
`oreign Attorney May Not Represent Applicant - Advisory
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he application indicates that a foreign attorney either represents applicant and/or has been identified as the correspondent in this application.(cid:160)
`When responding to this Office action, please note that the only attorneys who may sign responses and otherwise practice before the USPTO in
`trademark matters are as follows:
`
`(1)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(2)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`Attorneys in good standing with a bar of the highest court of any U.S. state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and other
`federal territories and possessions of the United States
`
`Canadian agents/attorneys who represent applicants located in Canada and (a) are registered with the USPTO and in good
`standing as patent agents or (b) have been granted reciprocal recognition by the USPTO
`
`(cid:160)S
`
`ee 37 C.F.R. §§2.17(a), (e), 2.62(b), 11.1, 11.14(a), (c); TMEP §§602, 712.01.
`
`(cid:160)F
`
`oreign attorneys, other than authorized Canadian 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).(cid:160) See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§§2.17(e), 11.14(c), (e); TMEP §602.03-.03(c).(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`Unless the identified foreign attorney can establish that he or she is authorized under 37 C.F.R. §11.14, then this attorney is not authorized to
`practice before the USPTO in trademark matters and may not sign responses or otherwise represent applicant in this application.(cid:160) See 37 C.F.R.
`§2.62(b); TMEP §602.03(e).(cid:160) Any power of attorney to this foreign attorney is void ab initio.(cid:160) TMEP §602.03(e).
`
`(cid:160)G
`
`eneral Response Guidelines
`
`(cid:160)F
`
`or this application to proceed toward registration, applicant must explicitly address each refusal and/or requirement raised in this Office action.(cid:160)
`If the action includes a refusal, applicant may provide arguments and/or evidence as to why the refusal should be withdrawn and the mark should
`register.(cid:160) Applicant may also have other options for responding to a refusal and should consider such options carefully.(cid:160) To respond to
`requirements and certain refusal response options, applicant should set forth in writing the required changes or statements.
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`f applicant has questions about its application or needs assistance in responding to this Office action, please telephone the assigned trademark
`examining attorney directly at the number below.
`
`(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`/Kevin M. Dinallo/
`United States Patent & Trademark Office
`Trademark Examining Attorney
`Law Office 107
`571-272-9731
`kevin.dinallo@uspto.gov
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)
`TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER: (cid:160) Go to http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp. (cid:160) 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.(cid:160)
`For technical assistance with online forms, e-mail TEAS@uspto.gov.(cid:160) For questions about the Office action itself, please contact the assigned
`trademark examining attorney.(cid:160) E-mail communications will not be accepted as responses to Office actions; therefore, do not respond to
`this Office action by e-mail.
`
`(cid:160)A
`
`ll informal e-mail communications relevant to this application will be placed in the official application record.
`
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`

`

`(cid:160)W
`
`HO MUST SIGN THE RESPONSE:(cid:160) 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).(cid:160) If an applicant is represented by an attorney, the attorney must sign the
`
`response.(cid:160)(cid:160)
`PERIODICALLY CHECK THE STATUS OF THE APPLICATION: (cid:160) 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/. (cid:160) Please keep a copy of the TSDR status screen. (cid:160) 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. (cid:160) For more information on checking
`status, see http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/process/status/.
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`O UPDATE CORRESPONDENCE/E-MAIL ADDRESS:(cid:160) Use the TEAS form at http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/correspondence.jsp.
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)
`

`

`Print: Sep 17, 2015
`
`77008755
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`TTOOBTSS
`
`Status
`SEOTION s & l5—ACCEPTED AND ACKNOWLEDGED
`
`Word Mark
`US AUTO PLUS
`
`Standard Character Mark
`No
`
`Registration Number
`3356868
`
`Date Registered
`2OO7x12x1S
`
`Type of Mark
`SERVICE MARK
`
`Register
`DR:NOIDAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[5 WORDS, LETTERS, ANDJOR NUMBERS IN STYLIZED EORM
`
`Owner
`UN:—SELEOT INO. CORPORATION CANADA ITO Boulevard Industriel
`Boucherville CANADA J4B2X3
`
`Goodsfservioes
`Class Status —— ACTIVE.
`
`IC 035.
`
`Us
`
`100 101 102.
`
`G 6: 3: Retail
`
`automobile parts and accessories stores. First Use: 2005f09fO8.
`First Use In Commerce: ZOOTHOB/19.
`
`Prior Registration(s)
`236369l;245893E;253lO89;AND OTHERS
`
`Disclaimer Statement
`NO OLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "AUTO" APART FROM THE
`MARK AS SHOWN.
`
`Description of Mark
`The mark consists of the stylized logo "US" and the words AUTO PLUS.
`
`Colors Claimed
`Color is not Claimed as a feature of the mark.
`
`.1.
`
`

`

`Print: Sep 17, 2015
`
`77008755
`
`Filing Date
`2UU6HU9:’27'
`
`Examining Attorney
`CARL, FRED
`
`Attorney of Record
`Brent E. Routman
`
`

`

`

`

`Pfini:Sep17,2fl15
`
`77008775
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`TTOOBTTS
`
`Status
`SEOTION s & l5—ACCEPTED AND ACKNOWLEDGED
`
`Word Mark
`US UNI—SELEOT AUTO PLUS
`
`Standard Character Mark
`No
`
`Registration Number
`3337907
`
`Date Registered
`2OO7x11x2O
`
`Type of Mark
`SERVICE MARK
`
`Register
`DR:NOIDAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[5 WORDS, LETTERS, ANDJOR NUMBERS IN STYLIZED EORM
`
`Owner
`UN:—SELEOT INO. CORPORATION CANADA ITO Boulevard Industriel
`Boucherville CANADA J4B2X3
`
`Goodsfservioes
`Class Status —— ACTIVE.
`
`IC 035.
`
`Us
`
`100 101 102.
`
`G 6: 3: Retail
`
`automobile parts and accessories stores. First Use: ZOOEKOBKOB.
`First Use In Commerce: ZOOEHOB/O8.
`
`Prior Registration(s)
`236369l;245893E;253lO89;AND OTHERS
`
`Disclaimer Statement
`NO OLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "AUTO" APART FROM THE
`MARK AS SHOWN.
`
`Description of Mark
`The mark consists of the stylized logo "US" with the term "UNI-S“
`on its left part, and the words AUTO PLUS.
`
`Colors Claimed
`Color is not claimed as a feature of the mark.
`
`.1.
`
`

`

`Print: Sep 17, 2015
`
`77008775
`
`Filing Date
`2006H09H27
`
`Examining Attorney
`CARL, FRED
`
`Attorney of Record
`Brent E. Routman
`
`

`

`

`

`Pfini:Sep17,2fl15
`
`77873641
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`11813641
`
`Status
`REGISTERED
`
`Word Mark
`AUTO SERVICE PLUS US
`
`Standard Character Mark
`No
`
`Registration Number
`3813995
`
`Date Registered
`2010101105
`
`Type of Mark
`SERVICE MARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[3
`DESIGN PLUS woR0S, LETTERS RN0x0R NUNEERS
`
`Owner
`UN: — SELECT INC. CORPORATION CANADA 110, Boulevard Industriel
`Boucherville, Quebec CANADA
`
`Goodsfserviees
`Class Status -- ACTIVE.
`
`IC 03?.
`
`US
`
`100 l03 l06.
`
`G & 3:
`
`Installation of Vehicle parts and accessories: mechanic services and
`installation of automobile parts offered at garages and garage service
`bays services by mechanics or professional installers; automotive
`Vehicles repair. First Use: 200?f12f0l. First Use In Commerce:
`200TH12H01.
`
`Disclaimer statement
`No CLRIM IS NRUE T0 THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT T0 USE "SERVICE" APART ERCN
`THE MARK AS SHOWN.
`
`Description of Mark
`in grey
`The mark consists of a grey and black car and the word "AUTO"
`on a black background on which appear repeated lines of the "US"
`logo
`in grey,
`the word "US" appears in red on the car, below,
`the word
`"SERVICE PLUS"
`in white on a red background.
`
`.1.
`
`

`

`Pfint:Sep17,2fl15
`
`77873641
`
`Colors Claimed
`
`The colorisl black, red, white and grey isfare claimed as a feature of
`the mark.
`
`Filing Date
`2009H11H16
`
`Examining Attorney
`NEVILLE , BRIAN
`
`Attorney of Record
`BJZ‘El”1t E. RC-utman
`
`

`

`

`

`Pfini:Sep1T,2fl15
`
`85640125
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`85640125
`
`Status
`REGISTERED
`
`Word Mark
`US AUTO PLUS UNI—SELECT
`
`Standard Character Mark
`No
`
`Registration Number
`43OSOS2
`
`Date Registered
`2OI3xO3x2S
`
`Type of Mark
`SERVICE MARK
`
`Register
`PR:NOIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[5 WORDS, LETTERS, ANDJOR NUMBERS IN STYLIZED EORM
`
`Owner
`UN:—SELEOT INC. OORPORATION OAUADA ITO, Boul. Industriel Boueherville,
`Quebec CENHDA J4B2X3
`
`Goodsfservioes
`Class Status —— ACTIVE.
`
`IC 035.
`
`Us
`
`100 101 102.
`
`G 6: 3: Retail
`
`automobile parts and accessories stores. First Use: 2009f12f3l.
`First Use In Commerce: 2009H12/31.
`
`Prior Registration(s)
`23lOT41;2TU34OE;333TBUT;3356868;354930?;355323l;AND OTHERS
`
`Disclaimer Statement
`NO OLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "AUTO" APART FROM THE
`MARK AS SHOWN.
`
`Description of Mark
`The mark consists of the stylized "US" design in which appear the
`words "UNI—SELECT", and the words "AUTO PLUS" are written below the
`"US" design.
`
`Colors Claimed
`
`

`

`Print: Sep 17, 2015
`
`85640125
`
`Color is not claimed as a feature of the mark.
`
`Filing Date
`2012x05x31
`
`Examining Attorney
`SWAIN, MICHELE
`
`Attumey of Record
`Brent E. Routman
`
`

`

`Auto Plus
`
`

`

`Pfini:Sep1T,2fl15
`
`65666663
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`85680663
`
`Status
`REGISTERED
`
`Word Mark
`US AUTO PLUS
`
`Standard Character Mark
`No
`
`Registration Number
`4327326
`
`Date Registered
`2OI3xO4x3O
`
`Type of Mark
`SERVICE MARK
`
`Register
`PR:NOIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[5 WORDS, LETTERS, ANDJOR NUMBERS IN STYLIZED EORM
`
`Owner
`UN:—SELEOT INC. OORPORATION OAUADA ITO, boulevard Industriel Montreal
`[Quebec] CHNHDA J4B2X3
`
`Goodsfservioes
`Class Status —— ACTIVE.
`
`IC 035.
`
`Us
`
`100 101 102.
`
`G 6 3: Retail
`
`automobile parts and accessories stores. First Use: 2012f06f30.
`First Use In Commerce: 20l2HO6/30.
`
`Prior Registration(s)
`2TO3406;335E8E8
`
`Disclaimer Statement
`NO OLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "AUTO" APART FROM THE
`MARK AS SHOWN.
`
`Description of Mark
`The mark consists of the stylized term "US" and the words "AUTO PLUS"
`appearing below.
`
`Colors Claimed
`Color is not claimed as a feature of the mark.
`
`.1.
`
`

`

`Print: Sep 1?, 2015
`
`85880663
`
`Filing Date
`20l2HO7f18
`
`Examining Attorney
`SWAIN, MICHELE
`
`Attorney of Record
`Brent E. Routman
`
`

`

`Auto Plus
`
`

`

`Pfini:Sep1T,2fl15
`
`78195418
`
`TYPED DRAWING
`
`Serial Number
`T8l954T6
`
`Status
`REGISTERED AND RENEWED
`
`Word Mark
`MR. TIRE
`
`Standard Character Merit
`No
`
`Registration Number
`2353522
`
`Date Registered
`2DD4xDex15
`
`Type ef Marl:
`SERVICE MARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[1] TYPED DRAWING
`
`Owner
`K & H TIRE,
`45833
`
`INC. CDRPDRATIDN OHIO 1125 GPENCERVILLE RDAD DELPHOS OHIO
`
`Goodsfserviees
`Claee Statue -- ACTIVE.
`
`IC 035.
`
`US
`
`100 101 102.
`
`G & 3: Retail
`
`truck and farm equipment
`store services in the field of automotive,
`tires. First Use: L963f04f04. First Use In Commerce: 1963/04f04.
`
`Goodsiservices
`Class Status —— RCTIVE.
`
`IC 03?.
`
`US
`
`100 103 106.
`
`G & S: flutomotive
`
`and truck repair and maintenance Services. First Use:
`First Use In Commerce:
`l963H04f04.
`
`l963f04f04.
`
`Prior Registration(s)
`1352199
`
`Dieclairner Statement
`NO GLAIH Is MADE To THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT To USE "TIRE" APART FROM THE
`MARK AS SHOWN.
`
`Filing Date
`
`

`

`Prini: Sep 17, 2015
`
`781954-T8
`
`2UU2g’l2,:’l"."
`
`Examining Attorney
`SMITH,ERIDGETT
`
`

`

`Pfini:Sep1T,2fl15
`
`78437010
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`T843TOlO
`
`Status
`SECTICN S & 15—ACCESTED AND ACKNCWLEDCED
`
`Word Mark
`MEINEKE
`
`Standard Character Mark
`Yes
`
`Registration Number
`3017555
`
`Date Registered
`2DD5x11x22
`
`Type of Marin
`SERvICE MARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[4
`STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
`
`Dvmer
`MEINEKE CAR CARE CENTERS, LLC LIMITED LIABILITY CCMRANY NCRTH CARCLINA
`440 SOUTH CHURCH STREET, SUITE TOO CHARLOTTE NORTH CRROLINR 28202
`
`Goodsfserviees
`
`G & S: Franchising
`lU2.
`100 lUl
`US
`IC 035.
`Class Status -- ACTIVE.
`services, namely, rendering technical assistance and business
`consultation in the establishment andfor operation of shops dealing in
`mechanical repair and maintenance services in the field of motor
`vehicles: retail store services featuring automotive mufflers, pipes,
`brakes, and shock absorbers; operation of a business for others,
`namely, automobile repair and maintenance shops. First Use:
`IQTEHOOEOO. First Use In Commerce:
`IQIZKOOKOO.
`
`Goodsiservices
`Class Status —— ACTIVE.
`
`IC 03?.
`
`US
`
`100 103 106.
`
`G & 8: Mechanical
`
`repair and maintenance services for motor vehicles; and other
`automobile maintenance services, namely, conducting oil changes.
`First Use:
`IQTZKOOKOO. First Use In Commerce:
`IQTZHOOHOO.
`
`Prior Registration(5)
`1201483:1241466;2Th=18-=13l:AND OTHERS
`
`

`

`Print: Sep 1?, 2015
`
`78437010
`
`Section 2f Statement
`2 t F] ENTIRE MARK
`
`Filing Date
`2004H06f17
`
`Examining Attorney
`DELL, MAUREEN
`
`Attorney of Record
`William H. Brewster
`
`

`

`1\/[EINEKE
`
`

`

`Pfini:Sep1T,2fl15
`
`85558700
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`S555STDD
`
`Status
`REGISTERED
`
`Word Mark
`BIG 3 TIRE
`
`Standard Character Mark
`Yes
`
`Registration Number
`4515579
`
`Date Registered
`2DI5xD1x2D
`
`Type of Marin
`SERVICE MARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[4]
`STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
`
`Owner
`K & M Tire, Inc. DBA Mr.
`Delphoe OHIO 45833
`
`Goodsfserviees
`Claee Statue —— ACTIVE.
`
`Tire CORPORATION OHIO I125 Spencerville Road
`
`IC 035.
`
`Us
`
`100
`
`101 102.
`
`G & 3: Retail
`
`store services in the field of automotive,
`tires. First Use: 20l2fO4fO1. First Use
`
`truck and farm equipment
`_n Commerce:
`2012/Odffll.
`
`Goodsiservices
`Class Status —— ACTIVE.
`
`IC D37.
`
`DS
`
`IDD
`
`and truck repair and maintenance services.
`Fire: Use In Commerce: 20l2HO4fO1.
`
`103 106.
`G & S: Rutomotive
`First Use:
`
`2Ul2fU4fUl.
`
`Disclaimer Statement
`NO CLHIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE
`MARK AS SHOWN.
`
`"TIRE" HPHRT FROM THE
`
`Filing Date
`2012/D3xD2
`
`Examining Attorney
`
`

`

`Prini: Sep 17, 2015
`
`05558700
`
`MAI, TINA
`
`Attorney of Record
`Scott M. Federoff
`
`

`

`Big 3 Tire
`
`

`

`Pfini:Sep1T,2fl15
`
`85821393
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`85821393
`
`Status
`REGISTERED
`
`Word Mark
`TIRE BUYER.COM
`
`Standard Character Merit
`No
`
`Registration Number
`4513123
`
`Date Registered
`2DI4x1DxD7
`
`Type of Marin
`SERvIcE MARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[3] DESIGN PLUS woRDS, LETTERS RNDxoR NDNEERS
`
`Dvmer
`American Tire Distributors, Inc. CORPORATION DELAWARE Suite 150 12200
`Herbert Wayne Court Huntersville NORTH CAROLINA 280103145
`
`Goodsfserviees
`Class Status -- ACTIVE.
`
`IC 035.
`
`US
`
`100 lUl
`
`IUZ.
`
`G & 3: On-line
`
`retail store services featuring automotive and vehicle tire tires,
`suspension systems, wheels, automotive equipment, after—market
`accessories and replacement parts; matching consumers with dealers in
`the field of automotive and vehicle tires, suspension systems, wheels,
`automotive equipment, after—market accesso