To:
`
`Subject:
`
`Sent:
`
`Sent As:
`
`Attachments:
`
`Agron, Ashley, J (mafiasis21@aol.com)
`
`TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 78253958 - AMERICAN PET IDOL - N/A
`
`10/31/03 11:15:35 AM
`
`ECom102
`
`Attachment - 1
`Attachment - 2
`Attachment - 3
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) SERIAL NO: 78/253958
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) APPLICANT:(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS:
`
`Agron, Ashley, J
`
`RETURN ADDRESS:(cid:160)
`Commissioner for Trademarks
`2900 Crystal Drive
`Arlington, VA 22202-3514
`ecom102@uspto.gov
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) Agron, Ashley, J
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) PO BOX 25821
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) WASHINGTON DC 20027-8821
`
`AMERICAN PET IDOL
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) MARK:(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO :(cid:160)(cid:160) N/A
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) CORRESPONDENT EMAIL ADDRESS:(cid:160)(cid:160) mafiasis21@aol.com
`
`Please provide in all correspondence:
`
`(cid:160)1
`
`.(cid:160) Filing date, serial number, mark and
`applicant's name.
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`2.(cid:160) Date of this Office Action.
`3.(cid:160) Examining Attorney's name and
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) Law Office number.
`4. Your telephone number and e-mail
`address.
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`O AVOID ABANDONMENT, WE MUST RECEIVE A PROPER RESPONSE TO THIS OFFICE ACTION WITHIN 6 MONTHS
`
`OFFICE ACTION
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`OF OUR MAILING OR E-MAILING DATE.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`Serial Number(cid:160) 78/253958
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he assigned examining attorney has reviewed the referenced application and determined the following.
`
`(cid:160)S
`
`ection 2(d) - Likelihood of Confusion Refusal
`The examining attorney refuses registration under Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d), because the applicant’s mark, when used
`on or in connection with the identified goods/services, so resembles the marks in U.S. Registration Nos. 2715725 and 2751431 as to be likely to
`cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive.(cid:160) TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.(cid:160) See the enclosed registrations.
`
`(cid:160)S
`
`ection 2(d) of the Trademark Act bars registration where a mark so resembles a registered mark, that it is likely, when applied to the
`goods/services, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake or to deceive. TMEP §1207.01.(cid:160) The Court in(cid:160) In re E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 476
`F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973), listed the principal factors to consider in determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion.(cid:160)
`Among these factors are the similarity of the marks as to appearance, sound, meaning and commercial impression and the similarity of the
`goods/services.(cid:160) The overriding concern is to prevent buyer confusion as to the source of the goods/services.(cid:160) Miss Universe, Inc. v. Miss Teen
`U.S.A., Inc., 209(cid:160)USPQ 698 (N.D. Ga. 1980).(cid:160) Therefore, any doubt as to the existence of a likelihood of confusion must be resolved in favor of
`
`the registrant.(cid:160) Lone Star Mfg. Co. v. Bill Beasley, Inc., 498 F.2d 906, 182 USPQ 368 (C.C.P.A. 1974).(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`The examining attorney must analyze each case in two steps to determine whether there is a likelihood of confusion.(cid:160) First, the examining
`attorney must look at the marks themselves for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation and commercial impression. (cid:160) In re E. I. DuPont de
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`

`
`Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1973).(cid:160) Second, the examining attorney must compare the goods or services to
`determine if they are related or if the activities surrounding their marketing are such that confusion as to origin is likely.(cid:160) In re August Storck KG,
`218 USPQ 823 (TTAB 1983); In re International Telephone and Telegraph Corp., 197 USPQ 910 (TTAB 1978); Guardian Products Co., v.
`Scott Paper Co., 200 USPQ 738 (TTAB 1978).
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`1.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`Similarity of Marks
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he examining attorney must compare the marks for similarities of sound, appearance, meaning or connotation.(cid:160) In re E. I. DuPont de Nemours
`& Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1973).(cid:160) Similarity in any one of these elements is sufficient to find a likelihood of confusion.(cid:160) In re
`Mack, 197 USPQ 755 (TTAB 1977).
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`n the present case, the respective marks are very similar in appearance, sound, commercial impression and connotation.(cid:160) The applicant’s mark
`merely adds the descriptive term “PET” between the terms “AMERICAN IDOL” in the registered marks.(cid:160) While the examining attorney
`cannot ignore a disclaimed portion of a mark and must view marks in their entireties, one feature of a mark may be more significant in creating a
`commercial impression.(cid:160) Tektronix, Inc. v. Daktronics, Inc., 534 F.2d 915, 189 USPQ 693 (C.C.P.A. 1976); In re El Torito Restaurants Inc., 9
`USPQ2d 2002 (TTAB 1988); In re Equitable Bancorporation, 229 USPQ 709 (TTAB 1986).(cid:160) Disclaimed matter is typically less significant or
`less dominant.
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(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)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`Commercial Relationship of Marks
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`f the marks of the respective parties are identical or highly similar, the examining attorney must consider the commercial relationship between
`the goods or services of the respective parties carefully to determine whether there is a likelihood of confusion.(cid:160) In re Concordia International
`Forwarding Corp., 222 USPQ 355 (TTAB 1983).
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he services of the parties need not be identical or directly competitive to find a likelihood of confusion.(cid:160) They need only be related in some
`manner, or the conditions surrounding their marketing be such, that they could be encountered by the same purchasers under circumstances that
`could give rise to the mistaken belief that the services come from a common source.(cid:160) In re Martin’s Famous Pastry Shoppe, Inc., 748 F.2d 1565,
`223 USPQ 1289 (Fed. Cir. 1984); In re Corning Glass Works, 229 USPQ 65 (TTAB 1985); In re Rexel Inc., 223 USPQ 830 (TTAB 1984);
`Guardian Products Co., Inc. v. Scott Paper Co., 200 USPQ 738 (TTAB 1978); In re International Telephone & Telegraph Corp., 197 USPQ 910
`(TTAB 1978).
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`n this case, the services appear to be closely related.(cid:160) The registrant provides talent shows on a popular television show.(cid:160) The applicant’s
`“entertainment contests” ostensibly include talent contests for pets that are in the nature of the applicant’s services.(cid:160) The prospective audience
`for each of the services would believe that the registrant has expanded its scope to include pet talent shows.
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`3.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`Parody Not A Defense
`
`(cid:160)P
`
`arody is generally not a defense to a likelihood of confusion refusal.(cid:160) There are confusing parodies and non-confusing parodies.(cid:160) See 3 J.
`McCarthy, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition, §31.153 (4th ed. 2000).(cid:160) A true parody actually decreases the likelihood of
`confusion because the effect of the parody is to create a distinction in the viewer’s mind between the actual product and the joke.(cid:160) While a
`parody must call to mind the actual product to be successful, the same success also necessarily distinguishes the parody from the actual product.(cid:160)
`Mutual of Omaha Insurance Co. v. Novak, 648 F. Supp. 905, 231 USPQ 963 (D. Neb. 1986).(cid:160) Here, however, the examiner finds that the
`respective marks and services are so similar that prospective consumers would be confused as to the source.(cid:160) See, e.g., Columbia Pictures
`Industries Inc., v. Miller, 211 USPQ 816 (TTAB 1981) (CLOTHES ENCOUNTERS held likely to be confused with CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF
`THE THIRD KIND, for men’s and women’s clothing); Cf., Jordache Enterprises, Inc. v. Hogg Wyld, Inc., 828 F.2d 1482, 4 USPQ2d 1216
`(10th Cir. 1987) (LARDASHE for pants was not an infringement of the JORDACHE mark).
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`4.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`Conclusion
`
`(cid:160)F
`
`or the reasons stated above, the examining attorney finds that the applicant’s mark is confusingly similar to the registered mark, and registration
`is properly refused under the Trademark Act Section 2(d).
`
`(cid:160)A
`
`lthough the examining attorney has refused registration, the applicant may respond to the refusal to register by submitting evidence and
`arguments in support of registration.
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`f the applicant chooses to respond to the refusal to register, the applicant must also respond to the following informal requirement.
`
`(cid:160)R
`
`ecitation of Services
`The recitation of services is unacceptable as indefinite because it is unclear as to the nature of the applicant’s “entertainment contests.” (cid:160) The
`
`applicant may adopt the following recitation, if accurate:(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`

`
`“Entertainment services, namely, pet talent contests,” in International Class 41.
`
`MEP §1402.11.
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`(cid:160)P
`
`lease note that, while an application may be amended to clarify or limit the identification, additions to the identification are not permitted.(cid:160) 37
`C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06.(cid:160) Therefore, the applicant may not amend to include any services that are not within the scope of the services
`recited in the present identification.
`
`(cid:160)D
`
`isclaimer:
`The applicant must disclaim the descriptive wording “PET” apart from the mark as shown. Trademark Act Section 6, 15 U.S.C. §1056; TMEP
`§§1213 and 1213.03(a).(cid:160) The wording is merely descriptive because that applicant’s services presumably include pet contests.
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he computerized printing format for the Trademark Official Gazette requires a standard form for a disclaimer.(cid:160)(cid:160) TMEP §1213.08(a)(i).(cid:160) A
`properly worded disclaimer should read as follows:
`
`No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “PET” apart from the mark as shown.
`
`See In re Owatonna Tool Co., 231 USPQ 493 (Comm’r Pats. 1983).
`
`(cid:160)F
`
`orm of Business Designation is Indefinite
`In the application, the applicant’s name is that of an individual, but it is identified as a corporation.(cid:160) This does not adequately designate the
`applicant’s form of business in accordance with TMEP section 802.03.(cid:160) The applicant must amend the application to specify whether it is an
`individual or a corporation.(cid:160) If it is an individual, the applicant must indicate its country of citizenship.(cid:160) If it is a corporation, the applicant must
`specify its state of incorporation.(cid:160) TMEP section 802.03.
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`f the record indicates that the applicant is not the owner of the mark, the examining attorney must refuse registration on that ground.(cid:160) The
`statutory basis for this refusal is Trademark Act Section 1, 15 U.S.C. Section 1051.(cid:160) When an application is filed in the name of the wrong party,
`this defect cannot be cured by amendment or assignment.(cid:160) 37 C.F.R. Section 2.71(d); TMEP section 803.06.(cid:160) However, if the application was
`filed by the owner, but there was a mistake in the manner in which the applicant’s name is set forth in the application, this may be corrected.(cid:160)
`See TMEP section 1201.02(c) for examples of correctable and non-correctable errors.
`
`(cid:160)C
`
`omments
`Current status and status date information is available, via push button telephone, for all federal trademark registration and application records
`maintained in the automated Trademark Reporting and Monitoring (TRAM) system.(cid:160) The information may be accessed by calling (703)
`305‑8747 from 6:30 a.m. until midnight, Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, and entering a seven‑digit registration number or eight‑digit
`application number, followed by the "#" symbol, after the welcoming message and tone.(cid:160) Callers may request information for up to five
`registration number or application number records per call.
`
`(cid:160)N
`
`o set form is required for response to this Office action.(cid:160) The applicant must respond to each point raised.(cid:160) The applicant should simply set
`forth the required changes or statements and request that the Office enter them.(cid:160) The applicant must sign the response.(cid:160) In addition to the
`identifying information required at the beginning of this letter, the applicant should provide a telephone number to speed up further processing.
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he applicant may wish to hire a trademark attorney because of the technicalities involved in the application.(cid:160) The Patent and Trademark Office
`cannot aid in the selection of an attorney.
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`n all correspondence to the Patent and Trademark Office, the applicant should list the name and law office of the examining attorney, the serial
`number of this application, the mailing date of this Office action, and the applicant's telephone number.
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`f the applicant has any questions or needs assistance in responding to this Office Action, please telephone the assigned examining attorney.
`
`/jbg/
`J. Brett Golden
`Trademark Examining Attorney
`Law Office 102
`703-308-9102/ ext. 178
`ecom102@uspto.gov
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160) (cid:160)
`
`How to respond to this Office Action:
`
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160)
`

`
`(cid:160)T
`
`o respond formally using the Office’s Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), visit http://www.uspto.gov/teas/index.html and
`follow the instructions.
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`o respond formally via E-mail, visit http://www.uspto.gov/web/trademarks/tmelecresp.htm and follow the instructions.
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`o respond formally via regular mail, your response should be sent to the mailing Return Address listed above and include the serial number, law
`office and examining attorney’s name on the upper right corner of each page of your response.
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`o check the status of your application at any time, visit the Office’s Trademark Applications and Registrations Retrieval (TARR) system at
`http://tarr.uspto.gov/
`
`about
`
`trademarks,
`
`you
`
`are
`
`encouraged
`
`to
`
`visit
`
`the Office’s web
`
`site
`
`at
`
`(cid:160)F
`
`information
`useful
`other
`and
`general
`or
`http://www.uspto.gov/main/trademarks.htm
`
`(cid:160)F
`
`OR INQUIRIES OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS OFFICE ACTION, PLEASE CONTACT THE ASSIGNED EXAMINING
`ATTORNEY.
`
`(cid:160)
`

`
`pet1
`
`pet (pèt) noun
`1.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) An animal kept for amusement or companionship.
`2.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) An object of the affections.
`3.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) A person especially loved or indulged; a favorite: the teacher's pet.
`
`(cid:160)a
`
`djective
`1.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) Kept as a pet: a pet cat.
`2.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) a. Particularly cherished or indulged: a pet grandchild. b. Expressing or showing affection: a pet name.
`3.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) Being a favorite: a pet topic.
`
`(cid:160)v
`
`erb
`pet·ted, pet·ting, pets verb, transitive
`To stroke or caress gently; pat. See synonyms at caress.
`
`(cid:160)v
`
`erb, intransitive
`Informal.
`To make love by fondling and caressing.
`
`(cid:160) [Scottish Gaelic peata, tame animal, pet, from Old Irish.]
`— pet ¹ter noun[1]
`
`[1]The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed
`from INSO Corporation; further reproduction and distribution restricted in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved.
`
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`

`
`Pfint:Oct3fl,2flfl3
`
`7fi4443?5
`
`
`
`Serial Number
`76444375
`
`Status
`REGISTERED
`
`Word Marl:
`AMERICAN IDDL
`
`Registration Number
`2Tl5725
`
`Dahafleghhued
`2003HO5Hl3
`
`Type of Mark
`SERVICE MARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[3] DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS ANDXOR NUMBERS
`
`Ehwner
`FremantleMedia North America, Inc. CORPDRAT ON IETAWHRE ZTUU Colorado
`Ave., 4th Floor Santa Monica CALIFORNIA 90404
`
`Guudsiservices
`ciass Status -- ACTIVE.
`
`IC D41.
`
`US
`
`IDD IDI
`
`lDT.
`
`G 5 S:
`
`Entertainment Services in the nature of a continuing television talent
`show; First Use: ZOOZIOEKII. First Use In Commerce: ZOOZIOEXII.
`
`Fmnglna
`ZOOZEOBHZE
`
`

`
`Print: Oct 30, 2003
`
`761-I-I-3?5
`
`Examining Attnmey
`ALT , JILL C .
`
`

`
`Print: Oct 30, 2003
`
`7811?!!!-0
`
`TYPED DRAWING
`
`Serial Number
`18117040
`
`Status
`REGISTERED
`
`Word Marl:
`AMERICAN IDOL
`
`Registration Number
`2T5l43l
`
`Date Registered
`2003!O8!l2
`
`Type of Mark
`SERVICE I‘-CLARE-C
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[1] TYPED DRAWING
`
`Owner
`FremantlsMsdia North America, Inc. CORPORATION DELAWARE 2700 Colorado
`Avenue, 4th Floor Santa Monica CALIFORNIA 90404
`
`Goodsfserviees
`G & S:
`100 101 10?.
`US
`IC 041.
`Class Status —— ACTIVE.
`Entertainment services in the nature of a continuing television talent
`show. First Use: 2002fO6fll. First Use In Commerce: 2002fO6{ll.
`
`Filing Date
`ZOOZHOBFZZ
`
`Examining Attnmey
`ALT, JILL C.