To:
`
`Subject:
`
`Sent:
`
`Sent As:
`
`Attachments:
`
`Superflex, Inc. (trademarks@morganlewis.com)
`
`U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 88008554 - BIOMEC - 119852-2042
`
`10/10/2018 2:45:08 PM
`
`ECOM121@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
`Attachment - 42
`Attachment - 43
`Attachment - 44
`
`

`

`Attachment - 45
`Attachment - 46
`Attachment - 47
`Attachment - 48
`Attachment - 49
`Attachment - 50
`Attachment - 51
`Attachment - 52
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
`OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
`
`U.S. APPLICATION
`SERIAL NO.   88008554
`
`           
`
`MARK: BIOMEC
`
`CORRESPONDENT
`ADDRESS:
`  
`       ANDREW J. GRAY IV
`  
`       MORGAN, LEWIS &
`BOCKIUS LLP
`         1400 PAGE MILL ROAD
`           PALO ALTO, CA 94304
`    
`   
`APPLICANT: Superflex, Inc.
`
`    
`
`*88008554*
`
`CLICK HERE TO RESPOND TO THIS
`LETTER:
`http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/response_forms.jsp
`
`VIEW YOUR APPLICATION FILE
`
`CORRESPONDENT’S
`REFERENCE/DOCKET
`
`NO:       
`
`  119852-2042
`CORRESPONDENT E-
`
`   
`
`MAIL ADDRESS:       
`
`trademarks@morganlewis.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: 10/10/2018
`
`The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney.  Applicant must respond timely and completely to
`the issue(s) 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 Potentially Conflicting Application
`Identification of Goods and Services Requires Amendment
`
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`  
` 
`  
`  
`

`

`SECTION 2(d) REFUSAL – LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION
`
`Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the marks BIOMEC (U.S. Registration No. 2339248),
`BIOMEX PROTECTION (U.S. Registration No. 2103788), BIOMEX (U.S. Registration No. 3022336) and BIOMECHANICS (U.S.
`Registration No. 3968647).  Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the attached registrations.
`
`BIOMEC for “business consulting services relating to the development and commercialization of biomedical technology” in International
`Class 35
`This is a partial refusal only as to International Class 42.
`
`BIOMEX PROTECTION for in relevant part “wearing apparel, namely, [ hats, sweaters, ] gloves and shoes” in International Class 25
`This is a partial refusal only as to International Classes 9, 25 and 42.
`
`BIOMEX for in relevant part “footwear; clothing, namely, gloves and hosiery; headwear, namely, hats; sports shoes, namely, snowboard
`and ski shoes” in International Class 25
`This is a partial refusal only as to International Classes 9, 25 and 42.
`
`BIOMECHANICS for “footwear, namely, shoes, slippers, training shoes, boots and sandals” in International Class 25
`This is a partial refusal only as to International Classes 9, 25 and 42.
`
`Trademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration of an applied-for mark that so resembles a registered mark that it is likely a consumer would be
`confused, mistaken, or deceived as to the source of the goods and/or services of the applicant and registrants.  See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).  
`Determining likelihood of confusion is made 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).  In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1322, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1747 (Fed. Cir.
`2017).  However, “[n]ot all of the [ du Pont] factors are relevant to every case, and only factors of significance to the particular mark need be
`considered.”   Coach Servs., Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356, 1366, 101 USPQ2d 1713, 1719 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting In re
`Mighty Leaf Tea, 601. F.3d 1342, 1346, 94 USPQ2d 1257, 1259 (Fed. Cir 2010)).  The USPTO may focus its analysis “on dispositive factors,
`such as similarity of the marks and relatedness of the goods [and/or services].”   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)); see TMEP §1207.01.  
`
`Comparison of the Marks
`
`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 Davia, 110 USPQ2d 1810, 1812 (TTAB
`2014) (citing In re 1st USA Realty Prof’ls, Inc. , 84 USPQ2d 1581, 1586 (TTAB 2007)); In re White Swan Ltd., 8 USPQ2d 1534, 1535 (TTAB
`1988)); TMEP §1207.01(b).
`
`Applicant’s mark and the registered marks are similar in sound, appearance and commercial impression.   
`
`BIOMEC (U.S. Registration No. 2339248)
`
`In a likelihood of confusion determination, the marks in their entireties are compared for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation, and
`commercial impression.  In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1323, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2017); 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)); 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).  
`
`  These marks are identical in appearance, sound, and
`In the present case, applicant’s mark is BIOMEC and registrant’s mark is BIOMEC.
`meaning, “and have the potential to be used . . . in exactly the same manner.”   In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 116 USPQ2d 1406, 1411 (TTAB 2015),
`aff’d, 866 F.3d 1315, 123 USPQ2d 1744 (Fed. Cir. 2017).  Additionally, because they are identical, these marks are likely to engender the same
`connotation and overall commercial impression when considered in connection with applicant’s and registrant’s respective goods and/or
`services.  Id.
`
`BIOMEX PROTECTION (U.S. Registration No. 2103788), BIOMEX (U.S. Registration No. 3022336)
`
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`

`

`  One of the cited registrations
`In this case, both applicant’s mark and the marks in the cited registrations share the same first portion, “BIOME”.
`contains descriptive wording that is disclaimed.  Therefore the dominant wording in all three marks is the terms BIOMEC and BIOMEX. 
`Because the three marks share the majority of the same letters in each mark, the marks are similar in appearance and similar in sound.  Further,
`the letter “X” following “BIOME in the cited registration sounds similar to applicant’s mark, because when pronounced outloud, the
`registrant’s mark sound like the plural of applicant’s mark.
`
`There is no correct pronunciation of a mark because it is impossible to predict how the public will pronounce a particular mark.  See
`Embarcadero Techs., Inc. v. RStudio, Inc., 105 USPQ2d 1825, 1835 (TTAB 2013) (quoting In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1367, 101
`USPQ2d 1905, 1912 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re The Belgrade Shoe Co., 411 F.2d 1352, 1353, 162 USPQ 227, 227 (C.C.P.A. 1969)); TMEP
`§1207.01(b)(iv).  The marks in question could clearly be pronounced the same; such similarity in sound alone may be sufficient to support a
`finding that the marks are confusingly similar.  In re White Swan Ltd., 8 USPQ2d 1534, 1535 (TTAB 1988); see In re 1st USA Realty Prof’ls,
`Inc., 84 USPQ2d 1581, 1586 (TTAB 2007); TMEP §1207.01(b)(iv).
`
`Marks may be confusingly similar in appearance where similar terms or phrases or similar parts of terms or phrases appear in the compared
`marks and create a similar overall commercial impression.  See Crocker Nat’l Bank v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce , 228 USPQ 689,
`690-91 (TTAB 1986), aff’d sub nom. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Wells Fargo Bank, Nat’l Ass’n , 811 F.2d 1490, 1495, 1
`USPQ2d 1813, 1817 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (finding COMMCASH and COMMUNICASH confusingly similar); In re Corning Glass Works, 229
`USPQ 65, 66 (TTAB 1985) (finding CONFIRM and CONFIRMCELLS confusingly similar); In re Pellerin Milnor Corp., 221 USPQ 558, 560
`(TTAB 1983) (finding MILTRON and MILLTRONICS confusingly similar); TMEP §1207.01(b)(ii)-(iii).
`
`BIOMECHANICS (U.S. Registration No. 3968647)
`
`Applicant’s mark and the cited registration BIOMECHANICS are highly similar.   Both marks share the same first portion BIOMEC.  This is the
`sole wording in applicant’s mark.   Because applicant’s mark as no other wording to distinguish its mark from that of the registrant’s mark, the
`marks are therefore similar in appearance and sound.
`
`Consumers are generally more inclined to focus on the first word, prefix, or syllable in any trademark or service mark.  See Palm Bay Imps., Inc.
`v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee En 1772, 396 F.3d 1369, 1372, 73 USPQ2d 1689, 1692 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (“VEUVE . . . remains a
`‘prominent feature’ as the first word in the mark and the first word to appear on the label”);
`In re Integrated Embedded, 120 USPQ2d 1504,
`1513 (TTAB 2016) (“[T]he dominance of BARR in [a]pplicant’s mark BARR GROUP is reinforced by its location as the first word in the
`mark.”); Presto Prods., Inc. v. Nice-Pak Prods., Inc., 9 USPQ2d 1895, 1897 (TTAB 1988) (“it is often the first part of a mark which is most
`likely to be impressed upon the mind of a purchaser and remembered” when making purchasing decisions).
`
`Further, because of the shared first portion, the applicant’s mark may appear as a shortened form from that of the cited registration.   Marks may
`be confusingly similar in appearance where similar terms or phrases or similar parts of terms or phrases appear in the compared marks and create
`a similar overall commercial impression.  See Crocker Nat’l Bank v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce , 228 USPQ 689, 690-91 (TTAB
`1986), aff’d sub nom. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Wells Fargo Bank, Nat’l Ass’n , 811 F.2d 1490, 1495, 1 USPQ2d 1813, 1817
`(Fed. Cir. 1987) (finding COMMCASH and COMMUNICASH confusingly similar); In re Corning Glass Works, 229 USPQ 65, 66 (TTAB
`1985) (finding CONFIRM and CONFIRMCELLS confusingly similar); In re Pellerin Milnor Corp., 221 USPQ 558, 560 (TTAB 1983) (finding
`MILTRON and MILLTRONICS confusingly similar); TMEP §1207.01(b)(ii)-(iii).
`
`Thus, applicant’s mark and the marks in the cited registrations are confusingly similar.
`
`Comparison of the Goods and/or Services
`
`In addition to possessing similar marks, applicant and the registrants use their marks to identify similar and related goods and/or services.
`
`The goods and/or services are compared to determine whether they are similar, commercially related, or travel in the same trade channels.  See
`Coach Servs., Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356, 1369-71, 101 USPQ2d 1713, 1722-23 (Fed. Cir. 2012); Herbko Int’l, Inc. v. Kappa
`Books, Inc., 308 F.3d 1156, 1165, 64 USPQ2d 1375, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2002); TMEP §§1207.01, 1207.01(a)(vi).
`
`The compared goods and/or 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 goods and/or 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).
`
`Where the marks of the respective parties are identical, as in this case, the degree of similarity or relatedness between the goods and/or services
`
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`

`

`needed to support a finding of likelihood of confusion declines.  See In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 116 USPQ2d 1406, 1411 (TTAB 2015) (citing In re
`Shell Oil Co., 992 F.2d 1204, 1207, 26 USPQ2d 1687, 1689 (Fed. Cir. 1993)), aff’d , 866 F.3d 1315, 123 USPQ2d 1744 (Fed. Cir. 2017); TMEP
`§1207.01(a).
`
`Registrant’s services are “business consulting services relating to the development and commercialization of biomedical technology” and
`applicant’s provides “providing a website featuring information and technology in connection with a powered exosuit system to provide
`physical movement assistance and support in connection with an individual's activities of daily living, as well as to improve strength, mobility,
`endurance, stability, and other motor and biomechanical functions”.   The biomedical technology of relation to registrant’s services could include
`
`the technology being featured in applicant’s services.   
`
`In addition, applicant’s clothing items are related to the cited registrations in International Class 5.   The attached Internet evidence consisting of
`third party websites establishes that the same entity commonly provides the relevant goods and markets the goods under the same mark.  For
`example, https://www.thenorthface.com, https://store.nike.com, and https://www.underarmour.com provide base layer clothing items, footwear
`and gloves of similarity to applicant’s and registrant’s goods to consumers. In addition, applicant’s International Class 9 and 42 goods and/or
`services are related to registrant’s clothing items as clothing items often contain smart features such as sensors or interfaces that provide the user
`with technological or health related metrics. Thus, applicant’s and registrant’s goods and/or 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).
`In total, the marks create the same commercial impression and the evidence shows that the goods and/or services are commercially related and
`likely to be encountered together in the marketplace by consumers.  Upon encountering applicant’s mark and the registered marks, consumers
`are likely to be confused and mistakenly believe that the respective goods and/or services emanate from a common source.  Therefore,
`registration must be refused based upon Trademark Act Section 2(d).
`Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusal(s) by submitting evidence and arguments in
`support of registration.
`
`If applicant responds to the refusal(s), applicant must also respond to the requirement(s) set forth below.
`
`PRIOR-FILED POTENTIALLY CONFLICTING APPLICATIONS
`
`The filing date of pending U.S. Application Serial Nos. 87810966 and 87810990 precedes applicant’s filing date.  See attached referenced
`applications.  If the marks in the referenced application register, applicant’s mark may be refused registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d)
`because of a likelihood of confusion between the 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 applications.
`
`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.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF GOODS AND SERVICES REQUIRES AMENDMENT
`
`The wording indicated below in the identification of goods and/or services are indefinite and must be clarified because it does not make clear the
`nature of the goods and/or services with sufficient specificity.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §1402.01.
`
`Specifically in International Class 9, “A wearable Electromechanical system, sensors, connected communication, and accompanying software
`application, interface, and back-end component to provide physical assistance and other interaction to affect strength, mobility, endurance,
`stability, and other functions” must be clarified because it does not adequately identify what the system comprises.   The wording “computer
`hardware and software for use in connection with a powered exosuit system to provide physical assistance and other interaction to affect strength,
`mobility, endurance, stability, and other functions” is indefinite because it does not indicate the function of the software and “downloadable
`
`computer software for use in managing the foregoing system” is indefinite because it does not detail the system that is managed.   
`
`In class 10, “Medical devices, namely, electromedical equipment and apparatus to support, assist, diagnose, and provide therapy to individuals
`with muscular dystrophy, neuromuscular disabilities, and similar conditions and to individuals with movement limitations due to orthopedic
`injuries or surgical procedures” is indefinite applicant must specify the nature of the devices being identified.   Applicant may accomplish this by
`describing the design of the device, the nature of how it works, or a combination.
`
`The identification of goods in International Class 25 is indefinite because applicant must specify any additional clothing items properly classified
`in this class.  In addition, applicant must clarify the type of clothing because general clothing items are in International Class 25, while robotic
`
` 
` 
`  
` 
` 
`  
` 
` 
` 
`

`

`exoskeleton suits are properly classified in International Class 9.
`
`The identification of services in International Class 42 is indefinite and needs clarification because the function of the platform and software is
`required, and further clarification as to what the technology provided enables users to do is also required.  Lastly, the entry “downloadable
`computer software for use in managing the foregoing system” is indefinite and must be clarified because downloadable software is a good
`properly classified in International Class 9.
`
`Applicant may substitute the following wording, if accurate (suggestions in bold):
`
`International Class 9: Electromechanical wearable system comprised of electrical sensors, computer hardware for data
`communication and accompanying mobile software application, hardware user interface, and back-end hardware component for data
`collection regarding use, movements and body system records to provide physical movement assistance and other interaction to
`affect to improve strength, mobility, endurance, stability, and other motor and biomechanical functions; computer hardware and
`software for {indicate function, e.g., operating, managing and monitoring} use in connection with a powered exosuit clothing system
`to provide physical assistance and other interaction to affect strength, mobility, endurance, stability, and other motor and biomechanical
`functions; downloadable computer software for use in managing the foregoing system comprised of a power assist suit or garment that
`is made with and controlled by apparel, software and hardware components; downloadable computer software for use in
`managing a exosuit clothing system to provide physical movement assistance and support in connection with an individual's
`activities of daily living, as well as to improve strength, mobility, endurance, stability and other motor and biomechanical
`functions; Powered robotic exoskeleton suits worn by humans for the purpose of enhancing the strength and endurance of the
`person wearing the suit
`
`International Class 10: Medical devices, namely, electromedical equipment and apparatus featuring a power assist suit, clothing
`garments, and computer software and hardware sold together as a unit to support, assist, diagnose, and provide therapy to
`individuals with muscular dystrophy, neuromuscular disabilities, and similar conditions and to individuals with movement limitations due
`to orthopedic injuries or surgical procedures
`
`International Class 25: Clothing in the nature of base layer clothing, namely, one piece body suits and unitards; Clothing in the
`nature of base layer clothing, namely, cycling outfits, shorts, jerseys, wrestling unitards and one piece bathing suits for use in
`connection with a system to provide physical assistance and other interaction to improve strength, mobility, endurance, stability
`and other motor and biomechanical functions
`
`International Class 42: Platform as a service (PAAS) featuring computer software platforms and providing temporary use of on-
`line non-downloadable software applications for use in connection with {specify function, e.g., operating, managing and monitoring} a
`powered exosuit clothing system to provide physical movement assistance and support in connection with an individual's activities of
`daily living, as well as to improve strength, mobility, endurance, stability, and other motor and biomechanical functions; downloadable
`computer software for use in managing the foregoing system; providing a website featuring information and in the field of computer
`technology in connection with relating to the hardware and software for a powered exosuit clothing system to provide physical
`movement assistance and support in connection with an individual's activities of daily living, as well as to improve strength, mobility,
`endurance, stability, and other motor and biomechanical functions
`
`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).
`
`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
`
`If applicant has questions regarding this Office action, please telephone or e-mail the assigned trademark examining attorney.  All relevant e-mail
`communications will be placed in the official application record; however, an e-mail communication will not be accepted as a response to this
`Office action and will not extend the deadline for filing a proper response.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(c), 2.191; TMEP §§304.01-.02, 709.04-.05. 
`Further, although the trademark examining attorney may provide additional explanation pertaining to the refusal(s) and/or requirement(s) in this
`Office action, the trademark examining attorney may not provide legal advice or statements about applicant’s rights.   See TMEP §§705.02,
`709.06.
`
`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.     
`
`Krystina Osgood
`/Krystina Osgood/
`Trademark Examining Attorney
`Law Office 121
`(571) 272-8403
`Krystina.Osgood@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.
`
` 
` 
` 
` 
`  
`

`

`Pfint:0mfl1fl,2fl1fl
`
`74511965
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`T4611966
`
`Status
`REGISTERED AND RENEWED
`
`Word Mark
`BIOMEX PROTECTION
`
`Standard Character Mark
`No
`
`Registration Number
`2103188
`
`Date Registered
`lSSTXIOXOT
`
`Type of Mark
`TRADEMARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[3] DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS ANDXOR NUMBERS
`
`Owner
`Prototeo Aktiengesellsohaft CORPORATION LIECHTENSTEIN Landstrasse 104
`9490 Vaduz LIECHTENSTEIN
`
`GoodsfServiees
`Class Status —— ACTIVE.
`
`10 028.
`
`US
`
`022 023 038 050.
`
`G a S:
`
`athletic equipment, namely elastic inserts providing support and
`protection for elbow joints and ankles integrated into gloves and
`shoes. First Use: 1995IOTIOO. First Use In Commerce:
`lBBSIlUfUU.
`
`GoodsJ'Serviees
`
`G & S: wearing
`022 039.
`US
`IC 025.
`Class Status -- ACTIVE.
`] gloves and shoes. First Use:
`apparel, namely,
`[ hats, sweaters,
`lQQEHOT/OO. First Use In Commerce: 1995HIOHOO.
`
`Disclaimer Statement
`NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "PROTECTION" APART FROM
`THE MARK AS SHOWN.
`
`LininQIStippling Statement
`The stippling in the drawing is a design feature of the mark.
`
`.1.
`
`

`

`Print: Out 10, 201B
`
`74611965
`
`Filing Date
`1994H12H16
`
`Examining Attorney
`CHARLON , BARNEY
`
`Attorney of Record
`Katrin Lewertoff and Leslie K. Mitchell
`
`

`

`
`
`

`

`Print: Oct 10, 201B
`
`T551544“
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`serial Number
`T5515481
`
`Status
`SECTION 8 & 15—ACCEPTED AND ACKNCWLEDGED
`
`Word Mark
`EICMEC
`
`Standard Character Mark
`No
`
`Registration Number
`2339248
`
`Date Registered
`2000x04x04
`
`Type of Mark
`SERVICE MARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[i] TYPED DRAWING
`
`Owner
`GREATEATCH LTD. CCRPCRATICN NEW YORK 9545 WEHRLE DRIVE CLARENCE NEW
`YORK 14031
`
`GoodsfServioes
`Class Status -- ACTIVE.
`
`IC 035.
`
`US
`
`100 101 102.
`
`G a S: business
`
`consulting services relating to the development and commercialization
`of biomedical technology. First Use:
`lBBBHOBHOl. First Use In
`Commerce:
`lBBBKUBKUl.
`
`Filing Date
`lQQBHOTHUS
`
`Examining Attorney
`KING. LINDA
`
`.i-‘dtornegpr of Record
`
`JOHN M. DEL VECCHIO
`
`

`

`BIOMEC
`
`

`

`Pfint:0mfl1fl,2fl1fl
`
`TB215053
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`serial Number
`T6215053
`
`Status
`REGISTERED AND RENEWED
`
`Word Mark
`BIOMEX
`
`Standard Character Mark
`No
`
`Registration Number
`3022336
`
`Date Registered
`zoosxizxes
`
`Type of Mark
`TRADEMARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[1] TYPED DRAWING
`
`Owner
`Prototec AG CORPORATION LIECHTENSTEIN Landstrasse 104 FL—9490 Vaduz
`LIECHTENSTEIN
`
`GoodsfServiees
`Class Status —— SECTION 8 — CANCELLED.
`
`IC 012.
`
`US
`
`019 021 023 031
`
`035 044.
`
`G a S:
`
`[ bicycles and motorized scooters ].
`
`Goodsfiewiees
`footwear;
`G a S:
`022 039.
`US
`IC 025.
`Class Status -- ACTIVE.
`
`
`clothing, namely, gloves and hosiery; headwear, namely, hats; sports
`shoes, namely, snowboard and ski shoes.
`
`GoodsiServiees
`Class Status -- ACTIVE.
`
`IC 028.
`
`US
`
`022 023 038 050.
`
`G d S:
`
`gymnastic and sporting articles, namely, elastic inserts providing
`support and protection for elbow joints and ankles integrated into
`sport gloves and shoes; gymnastic and sports apparatus, namely, skis,
`tennis rackets, fishing rods, skateboards, snowboards, sledges, ski
`poles, surfboards,
`inline skates, non—motorized scooters; exercise
`machines; roller skates;
`ice skates; shoes, clothing, gloves and
`hosiery with integrated protected orthotics for knee joints, ankles,
`
`.1.
`
`

`

`Print: Oct 10, 201B
`
`T6215053
`
`arm and shoulder jointsIr and for spinal columns; body protective
`orthotios; all the aforesaid goods for use in the field of sportswear
`and athletics wear and none having a post-operative or surgical
`application.
`
`Foreign lCountry Name
`ERPN CMNTY TM OFC
`
`Foreign Registration Number
`001900339
`
`Foreign Registration Date
`2004x12x17
`
`Foreign Expiration Date
`2010x10x15
`
`Foreign li'..=ountry Name
`ERPN CMNTY TM 09o
`
`Foreign Registration Number
`2091335
`
`Foreign Registration Date
`ZOOOHlOHlE
`
`Foreign Expiration Date
`ZOlOHlOHlE
`
`Prior Registration(s)
`2103799
`
`Filing Date
`2001x02x22
`
`Examining Attorney
`COGGINS, ROBERT
`
`Attorney of Record
`Michael J. Folise
`
`

`

`BIOMEX
`
`

`

`Print: Oct 10, 201B
`
`T906231“!
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`serial Number
`TBOEZBOO
`
`Status
`SECTION Tl & 15—ACCERTED AND ACKNCWLEDGED
`
`Word Mark
`DICMECANICS
`
`Standard Character Mark
`Yes
`
`Registration Number
`396864?
`
`Date Registered
`2011x05x31
`
`Type of Mark
`TRADEMARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[4]
`STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
`
`Owner
`GARVELIN CALZADOS, S.L. Soniedad de Responsabilidad Limitada SPAIN Pla
`Sant Josep, 150 E-UBZBB ELCHE [HLICHNTE] SPAIN
`
`GoodsfServioes
`
`[ Clothing,
`G & S:
`022 039.
`US
`IC 025.
`Class Status -- ACTIVE.
`namely,
`trousers, shorts, shirts, tee-shirts, skirts, socks,
`underwear,
`jackets, sweaters, pyjamas, anoraks, coats, gabardines,
`sashes for wear, neokties, belts and swimming costumes,
`]
`footwear,
`namely, shoes, slippers, training shoes, boots and sandals [
`;
`headwear ].
`
`Filing Date
`2008/09/24
`
`Examining Attorney
`KHAN, ASMAT
`
`Attorneyr of Record
`Lawrence E. Abelman
`
`

`

`BIOMECANICS
`
`

`

`Print: Oct 10, 2013
`
`37810966
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`serial Number
`8T810966
`
`Status
`NON—FINAL ACTION — MAILED
`
`Word Mark
`B BIONECH ENGINE
`
`Standard Character Mark
`No
`
`Type of Mark
`TRADEMARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[3] DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS ANDXOR NUMBERS
`
`Owner
`Eeflex Inc. CORPORATION REPUBLIC OF KOREA Room 2120 Changjo B/D, 193
`Munji—ro, Yuseong—gu Daejeon REPUBLIC OF KOREA 34051
`
`GoodSIServioes
`Class Status -- ACTIVE.
`
`IC 009.
`
`US
`
`021 023 026 036 038.
`
`G & S:
`
`Headphones for smart phones: Music headphones: Headphones: Accessories
`for digital or electronic tablets in the nature of earphones;
`Earphones for use with mobile telecommunication devices; Wireless
`earphones; Earphones for smart phones; Earphones; Earphones and
`headphones; 30 spectacles; Theatre glasses; Digital video eyewear;
`Spectacles for industrial purposes; Smartglasses; Glasses for sports;
`Eyewear type smart phone; Augmented reality software: Computer
`featuring interactive