To:
`
`Subject:
`
`Sent:
`
`Sent As:
`
`Attachments:
`
`Conway, Michael (privacy@trademarkengine.com)
`
`U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 88006437 - HR - N/A
`
`10/5/2018 5:17:19 PM
`
`ECOM123@USPTO.GOV
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
`OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
`
`U.S. APPLICATION
`SERIAL NO.   88006437
`
`           
`
`MARK: HR
`
`CORRESPONDENT
`ADDRESS:
`  
`       CONWAY, MICHAEL
`  
`       1905 PALACIA POINT
`DR.
`         RENO, NV 89521
`
`              
`    
`
`   
`APPLICANT: Conway,
`Michael
`
`*88006437*
`
`CLICK HERE TO RESPOND TO THIS
`LETTER:
`http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp
`
`VIEW YOUR APPLICATION FILE
`
`CORRESPONDENT’S
`REFERENCE/DOCKET
`
`   
`
`  N/A
`CORRESPONDENT E-
`
`NO:       
`MAIL ADDRESS:       
`
`privacy@trademarkengine.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.   A RESPONSE
`TRANSMITTED THROUGH THE TRADEMARK ELECTRONIC APPLICATION SYSTEM (TEAS) MUST BE RECEIVED BEFORE
`MIDNIGHT EASTERN TIME OF THE LAST DAY OF THE RESPONSE PERIOD.
`
`ISSUE/MAILING DATE: 10/5/2018
`
`The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney.  Applicant must respond timely and completely to
`the issue below.  15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.
`
`SEARCH OF OFFICE’S DATABASE OF MARKS ]
`
`The trademark examining attorney has searched the Office’s database of registered and pending marks and has found no conflicting marks that
`would bar registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d).  TMEP §704.02; see 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).
`
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`  
`   
` 
` 
` 
` 
`

`

`SUMMARY OF ISSUES:
`Ornamental Refusal
`
`ORNAMENTAL REFUSAL
`
`Registration is refused because the applied-for mark as used on the specimen of record is merely a decorative or ornamental feature of
`applicant’s clothing and, thus, does not function as a trademark to indicate the source of applicant’s clothing and to identify and distinguish
`applicant’s clothing from others.  Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, and 45, 15 U.S.C. §§1051-1052, 1127; see In re Lululemon Athletica Can. Inc.,
`105 USPQ2d 1684, 1689 (TTAB 2013); In re Pro-Line Corp., 28 USPQ2d 1141, 1142 (TTAB 1993); TMEP §§904.07(b), 1202.03 et seq.
`
`When evaluating a mark that appears to be ornamental, the size, location, dominance, and significance of the alleged mark as applied to the goods
`are all relevant factors in determining the commercial impression of the applied-for mark.  See, e.g., In re Lululemon Athletica Can. Inc., 105
`USPQ2d at 1687 (quoting In re Right-On Co., 87 USPQ2d 1152, 1156 (TTAB 2008)); In re Dimitri’s Inc., 9 USPQ2d 1666, 1667 (TTAB 1988);
`TMEP §1202.03(a).
`
`With respect to clothing, consumers may recognize small designs or discrete wording as trademarks, rather than as merely ornamental features,
`when located, for example, on the pocket or breast area of a shirt.  See TMEP §1202.03(a).  Consumers may not, however, perceive larger
`designs or slogans as trademarks when such matter is prominently displayed across the front of a t-shirt.  See In re Pro-Line Corp., 28 USPQ2d at
`1142 (holding BLACKER THE COLLEGE SWEETER THE KNOWLEDGE centered in large letters across most of the upper half of a shirt, to
`be a primarily ornamental slogan that was not likely to be perceived as a source indicator); In re Dimitri’s Inc., 9 USPQ2d at 1667-68 (holding
`SUMO used in connection with stylized depictions of sumo wrestlers and displayed in large lettering across the top-center portion of t-shirts and
`caps, to be an ornamental feature of the goods that did not function as a trademark); TMEP §1202.03(a), (b), (f)(i), (f)(ii).
`
`In this case, the submitted specimen shows the applied-for mark, HR, located directly on the front portion of two hats, where ornamental
`elements often appear.  See TMEP §1202.03(a), (b).  Furthermore, the mark is displayed in a relatively large size on the clothing such that it
`dominates the overall appearance of the goods.  Lastly, the applied-for mark appears to be a design element that is merely decorative and has
`little or no particular source-identifying significance.
`
`Therefore, consumers would view the applied-for mark as a decorative or ornamental feature of the goods, rather than as a trademark to indicate
`the source of applicant’s goods and to distinguish them from others.
`
`In appropriate circumstances, applicant may overcome this refusal by satisfying one of the following options:
`
`(1)      
`
`(2)      
`
`(3)      
`
`Submit a different specimen (a verified “substitute” specimen) that was in actual use in commerce at least as early as the filing
`date of the application (or prior to the filing of an amendment to allege use) and that shows proper trademark use for the identified
`goods in International Class 25.  Examples of acceptable specimens that show non-ornamental use on clothing include hang tags
`and labels used inside a garment.
`
`Amend to the Supplemental Register, which is a second trademark register for marks not yet eligible for registration on the
`Principal Register, but which may become capable over time of functioning as source indicators.
`
`Claim acquired distinctiveness under Trademark Act Section 2(f) by submitting evidence that the applied-for mark has become
`distinctive of applicant’s goods; that is, proof that applicant’s extensive use and promotion of the mark allowed consumers now
`directly to associate the mark with applicant as the source of the goods.
`
`(4)      
`
`Submit evidence that the applied-for mark is an indicator of secondary source; that is, proof that the mark is already recognized as
`
`a source indicator for other goods or services that applicant sells/offers.     
`
`(5)      
`
`Amend the filing basis to intent to use under Section 1(b).  This option will later necessitate additional fee(s) and filing
`requirements.
`
`For an overview of all response options referenced above and instructions on how to satisfy each option online using the Trademark Electronic
`Application System (TEAS) form, please go to http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/law/ornamental.jsp.
`
`RESPONSE GUIDELINES
`
`For this application to proceed further, applicant must explicitly address each refusal and/or requirement raised in this Office action.   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.  
`
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`

`

`Applicant may also have other options specified in this Office action for responding to a refusal and should consider those options carefully.   To
`respond to requirements and certain refusal response options, applicant should set forth in writing the required changes or statements.   For more
`information and general tips on responding to USPTO Office actions, response options, and how to file a response online, see “ Responding to
`Office Actions” on the USPTO’s website.
`
`If applicant does not respond to this Office action within six months of the issue/mailing date, or responds by expressly abandoning the
`application, the application process will end and the trademark will fail to register.   See 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.65(a), 2.68(a); TMEP
`§§718.01, 718.02.   Additionally, the USPTO will not refund the application filing fee, which is a required processing fee.   See 37 C.F.R.
`§§2.6(a)(1)(i)-(iv), 2.209(a); TMEP §405.04.
`
`When an application has abandoned for failure to respond to an Office action, an applicant may timely file a petition to revive the application,
`which, if granted, would allow the application to return to active status.   See 37 C.F.R. §2.66; TMEP §1714.   The petition must be filed within
`two months of the date of issuance of the notice of abandonment and may be filed online via the Trademark Electronic Application System
`(TEAS) with a $100 fee.   See 37 C.F.R. §§2.6(a)(15)(ii), 2.66(a)(1), (b)(1).
`
`  
`
`TEAS PLUS OR TEAS REDUCED FEE (TEAS RF) APPLICANTS – TO MAINTAIN LOWER FEE, ADDITIONAL
`REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET, INCLUDING SUBMITTING DOCUMENTS ONLINE:  Applicants who filed their application online
`using the lower-fee TEAS Plus or TEAS RF application form must (1) file certain documents online using TEAS, including responses to Office
`actions (see TMEP §§819.02(b), 820.02(b) for a complete list of these documents); (2) maintain a valid e-mail correspondence address; and (3)
`agree to receive correspondence from the USPTO by e-mail throughout the prosecution of the application.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.22(b), 2.23(b);
`TMEP §§819, 820.  TEAS Plus or TEAS RF applicants who do not meet these requirements must submit an additional processing fee of $125
`per class of goods and/or services.  37 C.F.R. §§2.6(a)(1)(v), 2.22(c), 2.23(c); TMEP §§819.04, 820.04.  However, in certain situations, TEAS
`Plus or TEAS RF applicants may respond to an Office action by authorizing an examiner’s amendment by telephone or e-mail without incurring
`this additional fee.
`
`If the applicant has any questions or requires assistance in responding to this Office Action, please telephone or email the assigned examining
`attorney.
`
`/Cori Stedman/
`Examining Attorney
`Law Office 123
`(571) 270-5090
`cori.stedman@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.
`
` 
` 
` 
`  
` 
` 
` 
` 
`  
`

`

`To:
`
`Subject:
`
`Sent:
`
`Sent As:
`
`Attachments:
`
`Conway, Michael (privacy@trademarkengine.com)
`
`U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 88006437 - HR - N/A
`
`10/5/2018 5:17:20 PM
`
`ECOM123@USPTO.GOV
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
`
`IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING YOUR
`U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION
`
`USPTO OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) HAS ISSUED
`ON 10/5/2018 FOR U.S. APPLICATION SERIAL NO. 88006437
`
`Your trademark application has been reviewed.  The trademark examining attorney assigned by the USPTO to your application has written an
`official letter to which you must respond.  Please follow these steps:
`
`(1)  READ THE LETTER by clicking on this link or going to http://tsdr.uspto.gov/, entering your U.S. application serial number, and clicking
`on “Documents.”
`
`The Office action may not be immediately viewable, to allow for necessary system updates of the application, but will be available within 24
`
`hours of this e-mail notification.  
`
`(2)  RESPOND WITHIN 6 MONTHS (or sooner if specified in the Office action), calculated from 10/5/2018, using the Trademark Electronic
`Application System (TEAS) response form located at http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp.  A response transmitted through
`TEAS must be received before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.
`
`Do NOT hit “Reply” to this e-mail notification, or otherwise e-mail your response because the USPTO does NOT accept e-mails as
`
`responses to Office actions.  
`
`(3)  QUESTIONS about the contents of the Office action itself should be directed to the trademark examining attorney who reviewed your
`
`application, identified below.  
`
`/Cori Stedman/
`Examining Attorney
`Law Office 123
`(571) 270-5090
`cori.stedman@uspto.gov
`
`WARNING
`
`Failure to file the required response by the applicable response deadline will result in the ABANDONMENT of your application.  For
`
`more information regarding abandonment, see http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/abandon.jsp.  
`
`PRIVATE COMPANY SOLICITATIONS REGARDING YOUR APPLICATION:  Private companies not associated with the USPTO are
`using information provided in trademark applications to mail or e-mail trademark-related solicitations.  These companies often use names that
`closely resemble the USPTO and their solicitations may look like an official government document.  Many solicitations require that you pay
`
`“fees.”   
`
`Please carefully review all correspondence you receive regarding this application to make sure that you are responding to an official document
`from the USPTO rather than a private company solicitation.  All official USPTO correspondence will be mailed only from the “United States
`
` 
`  
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`

`

`Patent and Trademark Office” in Alexandria, VA; or sent by e-mail from the domain “@uspto.gov.”   For more information on how to handle
`private company solicitations, see http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/solicitation_warnings.jsp.
`
`  
`