PTO Form 1957 (Rev 9/2005)
`
`OMB No. 0651-0050 (Exp. 07/31/2017)
`
`Response to Office Action
`
`Input Field
`
`SERIAL NUMBER
`
`LAW OFFICE ASSIGNED
`
`MARK SECTION
`
`MARK
`
`LITERAL ELEMENT
`
`STANDARD CHARACTERS
`
`USPTO-GENERATED IMAGE
`
`MARK STATEMENT
`
`ARGUMENT(S)
`
`The table below presents the data as entered.
`
`Entered
`
`85949846
`
`LAW OFFICE 110
`
`http://tess2.uspto.gov/ImageAgent/ImageAgentProxy?getImage=85949846
`
`KAI ACADEMIES KNOWLEDGE AND INNOVATION IN EDUCATION
`
`YES
`
`YES
`
`The mark consists of standard characters, without claim to any particular font style,
`size or color.
`
`The Examining Attorney has found no similar register mark that would bar registration under the Trademark Act, but has
`advised that there may be a likelihood of confusion between Applicant's(cid:160)KAI ACADEMIES KNOWLEDGE AND INNOVATION IN
`EDUCATION(cid:160)mark and the mark in prior pending U.S. Application Serial No. 85/854,338 (for a design mark including a prominent
`circular design element along with the wording “KAI Knowledge Advantage Inc.”).
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`t is well accepted that a finding of likelihood of confusion requires a probability of confusion and, thus, more than a mere
`possibility of confusion. American Steel Foundries v. Robertson, 269 U.S. 372 (1926); Rodeo Collection Ltd. v. West Seventh, 2
`U.S.P.Q.2d 1205, 1206 (9th Cir. 1987) ("Likelihood of confusion requires that confusion be probable, not simply a possibility.");
`Blue Bell Bio-Medical v. Cin-Bad, Inc., 9 U.S.P.Q.2d 1870, 1875 (5th Cir. 1989) ("[Plaintiff] must show, however, that confusion is
`probable; a mere possibility that some customers might mistakenly identify the [defendant's product] as [plaintiff's] product is not
`sufficient.").
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`t is further understood that "confusion" with another mark means more than the "calling to mind" of that mark. University
`of Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co., 217 U.S.P.Q. 505 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (likelihood of confusion means more
`than the likelihood that the public will recall a famous mark upon seeing the same or similar mark used by another).
`
`(cid:160)A
`
`pplicant respectfully traverses the refusal and submits that confusion between its mark and the cited marks is not likely,
`for the following reasons.
`
`(cid:160)1
`
`The Services Are Distinguishable
`.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`Applicant's mark is used in connection with services distinguishable from the goods identified in the cited registration.(cid:160)
`Registrant's goods are “business consulting services relating to the integration of the areas of business process
`technology, organizational learning, change management, and operationally sustainability,” and “educational services, namely,
`conducting classes, seminars, conferences, workshops, and webinars in the field of knowledge management, leadership
`development, diversity and multicultural communication, conflict resolution, and distribution of course material in connection
`therewith,” and “IT consulting services.”(cid:160) Accordingly, Registrant’s services focus on primarily on topics suitable for adults and
`upper management in corporations and the like – topics generally involving professional training, corporate training, corporate
`responsibility, leadership, diversity, ethics and organizational behavior-type topics.
`In sharp contrast, Applicant provides “business services in the nature of management and operation of elementary and
`secondary schools.”(cid:160) Stated more plainly, applicant intends to operate as a service provider providing administrative and
`operational support on an outsourced basis to run/operate elementary and secondary (K-12) schools. (cid:160)Accordingly, Applicant’s
`services will include matters such as:
`- (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) student recruitment and admissions;
`- (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) establishment of the school year calendar and school day schedule;
`-(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) administering and enforcing student disciplinary and special education hearings;
`
`

`

`- (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) purchasing instructional materials, equipment, and supplies;
`-(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) arranging for transportation and food services for students;
`- (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) operating and maintaining the school building/facility in accordance with leases, etc.;
`-(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) providing personnel services (including recruiting/training of instructional and non-instructional personnel, conducting
`background checks, and establishing staffing level recommendations);
`-(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) performing public relations functions;
`-(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) performing financial audits; and
`-(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) conducting and maintaining all aspects of the schools business administration, accounting operations, and financial
`reporting.
`Accordingly, Applicant’s services will allow an elementary or secondary (K-12) school to outsource its operations
`responsibilities.(cid:160)
`Accordingly, Registrant’s registration relates to the delivery of the educational content itself, whereas Applicant’s services
`relate to operational/ministerial aspects of a school’s operation.(cid:160) As a result, there are significant differences between the
`services of the respective parties such that confusion is unlikely.
`Further, neither Registrant’s services nor Applicant's services may be considered to be the subject of a perfunctory,
`spontaneous or casual purchase.(cid:160) Rather, the specialized purposes for which each of the goods are individually marketed, require
`that the goods be purchased only after very careful, as opposed to casual, consideration, thereby reducing, if not eliminating, the
`likelihood of confusion between Applicant's and Registrant's marks. See McCarthy, at §23.96; and Magnaflux Corp. v. Sonoflux
`Corp., 109 U.S.P.Q. 313 (C.C.P.A. 1956) ("other things being equal, confusion is less likely where goods are expensive and
`purchased after careful consideration than when they are purchased casually.").(cid:160) More specifically, purchases of grapes by
`winemakers are made only after careful consideration.(cid:160) Similarly, purchases of wine by consumers of wine are typically made only
`after careful consideration – and often by some of the most discriminating of ordinary consumers.
`Therefore, the services are distinguishable, and thus confusion is not likely.
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`The Trade Channels Are Different
`2.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`Further, there are distinct differences in the trade channels in which Registrant's and Applicant's(cid:160)services travel, not only in
`connection with the purchasers to whom they(cid:160)are offered, but also in connection with the conditions under which they are offered.
`
`The competing marks are not targeted to or likely to be encountered by the same class of customers.(cid:160) More specifically,
`
`(cid:160)Registrant's services(cid:160)are marketed differently than(cid:160)Applicant's services, and they(cid:160)are offered to dissimilar classes of persons.(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`The purchasers of (cid:160)Registrant’s services are likely to be middle/upper management personnel and/or highly trained
`information technology (IT) or human resources (HR) personnel in a corporation or similar organization.(cid:160)
`In contrast, the purchasers of Applicant’s services are likely to be members of the school’s administrative body, such as
`
`to one another, and would not be encountered under similar circumstances as to cause consumer confusion to their source.(cid:160)
`
`the school’s principal, or School Board.(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) Registrant’s and Applicant’s services are fundamentally different.(cid:160) They are neither competitive with nor complementary
`Further, they move through different channels of trade to different classes of purchasers.(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)The services simply do not travel in same trade channels -- they are(cid:160)offered and marketed(cid:160)to dissimilar classes of
`
`consumers.(cid:160) Accordingly, the likelihood of confusion between the marks is even further reduced. See McCormick & Co. v. B.
`Manischewitz Co., 98 U.S.P.Q. 367 (6th Cir. 1953) (no likelihood of confusion between spices and Kosher foods); Applebaum v.
`Senior, 115 U.S.P.Q. 243 (1st Dist. 1957) (orthopedic shoes versus ordinary shoes); Paul Sachs Originals Co. v. Sachs, 139
`U.S.P.Q. 414 (9th Cir. 1963) (girls' dresses and women's dresses sold in different stores to different customers); and Field
`Enterprises v. Cove Industries, 161 U.S.P.Q. 243 (E.D.N.Y. 1969) (different channels of encyclopedia distribution: door-to-door
`versus department store); see also, Dynamics Research Corp. v. Langenau Mfg. Co., 217 U.S.P.Q. 649 (Fed. Cir. 1983)
`(affirming decision of Board and its supporting reasoning that, because the prospective customers of the respective products
`were not the same, any overlap thereof was de minimis and the consumers were not uneducated, marketing under identical
`marks would not be likely to cause confusion, mistake or to deceive).
`Therefore, the dissimilarities in the relevant trade channels and purchasers are such that confusion is not likely.
`The Purchasers Are Sophisticated
`As referenced above, the purchasers of Registrant’s services are likely to be highly-trained and discerning middle/upper
`management personnel and/or highly trained information technology (IT) or human resources (HR) personnel in a corporation of
`
`(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)
`
`similar organization, and thus sophisticated.(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`Similarly, the purchasers of Applicant’s services include highly-trained members of the school’s administrative body, such
`as the school’s principal, or School Board.(cid:160) (cid:160)Such purchasers are sophisticated also.
`Such professionals are highly discriminating professionals, thereby reducing, if not eliminating, the likelihood of confusion
`between Applicant's and Registrant's marks. See McCarthy, at §23:101.(cid:160) See Oreck Corp. v. U.S. Floor Systems, Inc., 231
`U.S.P.Q. 634 (5th Cir. 1986) (purchasers who "are virtually certain to be informed, deliberate buyers" are not easily confused);
`
`(cid:160)
`

`

`Hayden Switch & Instrument, Inc. v. Rexnord, Inc., 4 U.S.P.Q.2d 1510 (D.C. Conn. 1987) ("[S]ophisticated purchasers of the
`products...enter the marketplace in search of specific products for specific...purposes.(cid:160) The sophistication of these purchasers
`makes the likelihood of confusion remote."); and Castle Oil Corp. v. Castle Energy Corp., 26 U.S.P.Q.2d 1481 (E.D. Pa. 1992)
`("Where, as here, different goods are sold, even if sold under the same mark, to different discriminating purchasers, there is no
`likelihood of confusion.").
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`hus, the purchasers of Applicant's services are highly discriminating and sophisticated professional purchasing agents.(cid:160)
`In view of such sophistication of the relevant purchasers, confusion is not likely.(cid:160)
`In view of the foregoing, it is believed that there is no potential conflict between the instant application and pending U.S.
`Application Serial No. 85/854,338.(cid:160) Accordingly, reconsideration is requested. It is thus believed that this application is now in
`condition to be passed for publication. Favorable action is earnestly solicited.
`
`(cid:160)F
`
`inally, it is noted that this preliminary response to the Action’s assertions in relation to U.S. Application Serial No.
`85/854,338 in no way limits applicant’s right to address this issue at a later point in time.(cid:160) Applicant expressly reserves the right
`to further respond to this issue during subsequent prosecution of the present application.
`
`ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS SECTION
`
`DISCLAIMER
`
`SIGNATURE SECTION
`
`RESPONSE SIGNATURE
`
`SIGNATORY'S NAME
`
`SIGNATORY'S POSITION
`
`DATE SIGNED
`
`AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
`
`FILING INFORMATION SECTION
`
`SUBMIT DATE
`
`TEAS STAMP
`
`No claim is made to the exclusive right to use ACADEMIES apart from the mark as
`shown.
`
`/gregory s. bernabeo/
`
`Gregory S. Bernabeo
`
`Attorney of record, PA bar member
`
`10/10/2013
`
`YES
`
`Thu Oct 10 09:59:14 EDT 2013
`
`USPTO/ROA-XX.XXX.XX.XXX-2
`0131010095914294764-85949
`846-500e9a0f639536aea88b1
`bbd74481a6d066227385216fd
`425ff2dda248bb59d1ab3-N/A
`-N/A-20131010095115883466
`
`PTO Form 1957 (Rev 9/2005)
`
`OMB No. 0651-0050 (Exp. 07/31/2017)
`
`To the Commissioner for Trademarks:
`
`Response to Office Action
`
`Application serial no. 85949846(cid:160)KAI ACADEMIES KNOWLEDGE AND INNOVATION IN EDUCATION(Standard Characters, see
`http://tess2.uspto.gov/ImageAgent/ImageAgentProxy?getImage=85949846) has been amended as follows:
`
`ARGUMENT(S)
`In response to the substantive refusal(s), please note the following:
`
`The Examining Attorney has found no similar register mark that would bar registration under the Trademark Act, but has
`advised that there may be a likelihood of confusion between Applicant's(cid:160)KAI ACADEMIES KNOWLEDGE AND INNOVATION IN
`EDUCATION(cid:160)mark and the mark in prior pending U.S. Application Serial No. 85/854,338 (for a design mark including a prominent
`circular design element along with the wording “KAI Knowledge Advantage Inc.”).
`
`(cid:160)
`

`

`It is well accepted that a finding of likelihood of confusion requires a probability of confusion and, thus, more than a mere
`possibility of confusion. American Steel Foundries v. Robertson, 269 U.S. 372 (1926); Rodeo Collection Ltd. v. West Seventh, 2
`U.S.P.Q.2d 1205, 1206 (9th Cir. 1987) ("Likelihood of confusion requires that confusion be probable, not simply a possibility."); Blue
`Bell Bio-Medical v. Cin-Bad, Inc., 9 U.S.P.Q.2d 1870, 1875 (5th Cir. 1989) ("[Plaintiff] must show, however, that confusion is
`probable; a mere possibility that some customers might mistakenly identify the [defendant's product] as [plaintiff's] product is not
`sufficient.").
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`t is further understood that "confusion" with another mark means more than the "calling to mind" of that mark. University of
`Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co., 217 U.S.P.Q. 505 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (likelihood of confusion means more than
`the likelihood that the public will recall a famous mark upon seeing the same or similar mark used by another).
`
`(cid:160)A
`
`pplicant respectfully traverses the refusal and submits that confusion between its mark and the cited marks is not likely, for
`the following reasons.
`
`(cid:160)1
`
`The Services Are Distinguishable
`.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`Applicant's mark is used in connection with services distinguishable from the goods identified in the cited registration.(cid:160)
`Registrant's goods are “business consulting services relating to the integration of the areas of business process technology,
`organizational learning, change management, and operationally sustainability,” and “educational services, namely, conducting
`classes, seminars, conferences, workshops, and webinars in the field of knowledge management, leadership development, diversity
`and multicultural communication, conflict resolution, and distribution of course material in connection therewith,” and “IT consulting
`services.”(cid:160) Accordingly, Registrant’s services focus on primarily on topics suitable for adults and upper management in
`corporations and the like – topics generally involving professional training, corporate training, corporate responsibility, leadership,
`diversity, ethics and organizational behavior-type topics.
`In sharp contrast, Applicant provides “business services in the nature of management and operation of elementary and secondary
`schools.”(cid:160) Stated more plainly, applicant intends to operate as a service provider providing administrative and operational support
`on an outsourced basis to run/operate elementary and secondary (K-12) schools. (cid:160)Accordingly, Applicant’s services will include
`matters such as:
`- (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) student recruitment and admissions;
`- (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) establishment of the school year calendar and school day schedule;
`-(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) administering and enforcing student disciplinary and special education hearings;
`- (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) purchasing instructional materials, equipment, and supplies;
`-(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) arranging for transportation and food services for students;
`- (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) operating and maintaining the school building/facility in accordance with leases, etc.;
`-(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) providing personnel services (including recruiting/training of instructional and non-instructional personnel, conducting
`background checks, and establishing staffing level recommendations);
`-(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) performing public relations functions;
`-(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) performing financial audits; and
`-(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) conducting and maintaining all aspects of the schools business administration, accounting operations, and financial
`reporting.
`Accordingly, Applicant’s services will allow an elementary or secondary (K-12) school to outsource its operations
`responsibilities.(cid:160)
`Accordingly, Registrant’s registration relates to the delivery of the educational content itself, whereas Applicant’s services
`relate to operational/ministerial aspects of a school’s operation.(cid:160) As a result, there are significant differences between the services
`of the respective parties such that confusion is unlikely.
`Further, neither Registrant’s services nor Applicant's services may be considered to be the subject of a perfunctory,
`spontaneous or casual purchase.(cid:160) Rather, the specialized purposes for which each of the goods are individually marketed, require
`that the goods be purchased only after very careful, as opposed to casual, consideration, thereby reducing, if not eliminating, the
`likelihood of confusion between Applicant's and Registrant's marks. See McCarthy, at §23.96; and Magnaflux Corp. v. Sonoflux
`Corp., 109 U.S.P.Q. 313 (C.C.P.A. 1956) ("other things being equal, confusion is less likely where goods are expensive and
`purchased after careful consideration than when they are purchased casually.").(cid:160) More specifically, purchases of grapes by
`winemakers are made only after careful consideration.(cid:160) Similarly, purchases of wine by consumers of wine are typically made only
`after careful consideration – and often by some of the most discriminating of ordinary consumers.
`Therefore, the services are distinguishable, and thus confusion is not likely.
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`The Trade Channels Are Different
`2.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`Further, there are distinct differences in the trade channels in which Registrant's and Applicant's(cid:160)services travel, not only in
`connection with the purchasers to whom they(cid:160)are offered, but also in connection with the conditions under which they are offered.
`
`The competing marks are not targeted to or likely to be encountered by the same class of customers.(cid:160) More specifically,
`(cid:160)Registrant's services(cid:160)are marketed differently than(cid:160)Applicant's services, and they(cid:160)are offered to dissimilar classes of persons.(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160)
`

`

`(cid:160)T
`
`he purchasers of (cid:160)Registrant’s services are likely to be middle/upper management personnel and/or highly trained
`information technology (IT) or human resources (HR) personnel in a corporation or similar organization.(cid:160)
`In contrast, the purchasers of Applicant’s services are likely to be members of the school’s administrative body, such as the
`
`one another, and would not be encountered under similar circumstances as to cause consumer confusion to their source.(cid:160) Further,
`
`school’s principal, or School Board.(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) Registrant’s and Applicant’s services are fundamentally different.(cid:160) They are neither competitive with nor complementary to
`they move through different channels of trade to different classes of purchasers.(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)The services simply do not travel in same trade channels -- they are(cid:160)offered and marketed(cid:160)to dissimilar classes of
`
`consumers.(cid:160) Accordingly, the likelihood of confusion between the marks is even further reduced. See McCormick & Co. v. B.
`Manischewitz Co., 98 U.S.P.Q. 367 (6th Cir. 1953) (no likelihood of confusion between spices and Kosher foods); Applebaum v.
`Senior, 115 U.S.P.Q. 243 (1st Dist. 1957) (orthopedic shoes versus ordinary shoes); Paul Sachs Originals Co. v. Sachs, 139
`U.S.P.Q. 414 (9th Cir. 1963) (girls' dresses and women's dresses sold in different stores to different customers); and Field
`Enterprises v. Cove Industries, 161 U.S.P.Q. 243 (E.D.N.Y. 1969) (different channels of encyclopedia distribution: door-to-door
`versus department store); see also, Dynamics Research Corp. v. Langenau Mfg. Co., 217 U.S.P.Q. 649 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (affirming
`decision of Board and its supporting reasoning that, because the prospective customers of the respective products were not the
`same, any overlap thereof was de minimis and the consumers were not uneducated, marketing under identical marks would not be
`likely to cause confusion, mistake or to deceive).
`Therefore, the dissimilarities in the relevant trade channels and purchasers are such that confusion is not likely.
`The Purchasers Are Sophisticated
`As referenced above, the purchasers of Registrant’s services are likely to be highly-trained and discerning middle/upper
`management personnel and/or highly trained information technology (IT) or human resources (HR) personnel in a corporation of
`
`(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)
`
`similar organization, and thus sophisticated.(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`Similarly, the purchasers of Applicant’s services include highly-trained members of the school’s administrative body, such
`as the school’s principal, or School Board.(cid:160) (cid:160)Such purchasers are sophisticated also.
`Such professionals are highly discriminating professionals, thereby reducing, if not eliminating, the likelihood of confusion
`between Applicant's and Registrant's marks. See McCarthy, at §23:101.(cid:160) See Oreck Corp. v. U.S. Floor Systems, Inc., 231 U.S.P.Q.
`634 (5th Cir. 1986) (purchasers who "are virtually certain to be informed, deliberate buyers" are not easily confused); Hayden
`Switch & Instrument, Inc. v. Rexnord, Inc., 4 U.S.P.Q.2d 1510 (D.C. Conn. 1987) ("[S]ophisticated purchasers of the
`products...enter the marketplace in search of specific products for specific...purposes.(cid:160) The sophistication of these purchasers
`makes the likelihood of confusion remote."); and Castle Oil Corp. v. Castle Energy Corp., 26 U.S.P.Q.2d 1481 (E.D. Pa. 1992)
`("Where, as here, different goods are sold, even if sold under the same mark, to different discriminating purchasers, there is no
`likelihood of confusion.").
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`hus, the purchasers of Applicant's services are highly discriminating and sophisticated professional purchasing agents.(cid:160) In
`view of such sophistication of the relevant purchasers, confusion is not likely.(cid:160)
`In view of the foregoing, it is believed that there is no potential conflict between the instant application and pending U.S.
`Application Serial No. 85/854,338.(cid:160) Accordingly, reconsideration is requested. It is thus believed that this application is now in
`condition to be passed for publication. Favorable action is earnestly solicited.
`
`(cid:160)F
`
`inally, it is noted that this preliminary response to the Action’s assertions in relation to U.S. Application Serial No.
`85/854,338 in no way limits applicant’s right to address this issue at a later point in time.(cid:160) Applicant expressly reserves the right to
`further respond to this issue during subsequent prosecution of the present application.
`
`ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS
`Disclaimer
`No claim is made to the exclusive right to use ACADEMIES apart from the mark as shown.
`
`SIGNATURE(S)
`Response Signature
`Signature: /gregory s. bernabeo/(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)Date: 10/10/2013
`Signatory's Name: Gregory S. Bernabeo
`Signatory's Position: Attorney of record, PA bar member
`
`The signatory has confirmed that he/she is an attorney who is a member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of a U.S. state, which
`includes the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and other federal territories and possessions; and he/she is currently the applicant's attorney or an
`associate thereof; and to the best of his/her knowledge, if prior to his/her appointment another U.S. attorney or a Canadian attorney/agent not
`
`

`

`currently associated with his/her company/firm previously represented the applicant in this matter: (1) the applicant has filed or is concurrently
`filing a signed revocation of or substitute power of attorney with the USPTO; (2) the USPTO has granted the request of the prior representative to
`withdraw; (3) the applicant has filed a power of attorney appointing him/her in this matter; or (4) the applicant's appointed U.S. attorney or
`Canadian attorney/agent has filed a power of attorney appointing him/her as an associate attorney in this matter.
`
`Serial Number: 85949846
`Internet Transmission Date: Thu Oct 10 09:59:14 EDT 2013
`TEAS Stamp: USPTO/ROA-XX.XXX.XX.XXX-2013101009591429
`4764-85949846-500e9a0f639536aea88b1bbd74
`481a6d066227385216fd425ff2dda248bb59d1ab
`3-N/A-N/A-20131010095115883466
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`