Goldstein, Steven
Ear pieces for the filtration of unwanted noises to the ear
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Office Action Response
Outgoing Trademark Office Action
Trademark Office Action Response
THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
TRADEMARK EXAMINING OPERATION
In re U.S. Trademark Application )
)
Applicant: Steven Goldstein ) Examining Atty: Matthews, Amos
)
)
Serial No.: 77/095722 ) Law Office: 117
)
Filed: January 31, 2007 ) Our Ref. No.: 092624.010200
)
Mark: EAR POLLUTION )
)
)
)
)
Assistant Commissioner for Trademarks
Post Office Box 1451
Alexandria, VA 22313-1451
BOX RESPONSES
NO FEE
RESPONSE TO NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION
Applicant Steven Goldstein (Applicant) hereby responds to the non-final Office
Action issued by the Examining Attorney on March 23, 2007. In the Office Action, the
Examining Attorney required amendments to the identification of goods, and a disclaimer
of exclusive rights to the wording Ear apart from the mark as shown. The Examining
Attorney also requested information clarifying the nature of the goods on which
Applicant intends to use its mark. Applicant responds to each of the requirements
individually below.
Likelihood of Confusion
Applicant notes with appreciation that the Examiner has found no similar
registered or pending marks which would bar registration.
Disclaimer
Applicant agrees to the required disclaimer of exclusive rights to EAR apart
from the Mark as shown. Applicant accordingly requests that the application be amended
to include the following statement:
No claim is made to the exclusive right to use EAR apart from the Mark as
shown.
Identification of Goods
The Examining Attorney has objected to the recitation of goods for being
indefinite. Please delete Identification of Goods in its entirety and substitute therefore:
International Class 9
Ear pieces for the filtration of unwanted noises to the ear.
The above amendment clarifies the nature of the computer services. Applicant
submits that the goods as presently defined are sufficiently definitive.
Request For Information
The Examining Attorney has requested that information be provided to more
clearly define the nature of the goods. Applicant submits that the goods are earpieces for
filtering unwanted noise and sounds from the ambient environment.
Evidence
In support of Applicant’s description Applicant attaches hereto as Exhibits A and
B printouts of web pages for similar goods.
Conclusion
As the foregoing satisfies all outstanding requirements regarding the application,
Applicant respectfully requests that the Examining Attorney approve the mark for
publication.
Respectfully submitted,
______/Richard E. Kurtz/_____________
Adam B. Landa
Wayne Harper
Attorneys for Applicant STEVEN GOLDSTEIN
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
1750 Tysons Boulevard
Suite 1200
McLean, Virginia 22102
Telephone: (407) 418-2356
Fax: (407) 650-8455
THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
TRADEMARK EXAMINING OPERATION
In re U.S. Trademark Application )
)
Applicant: Steven Goldstein ) Examining Atty: Matthews, Amos
)
)
Serial No.: 77/095722 ) Law Office: 117
)
Filed: January 31, 2007 ) Our Ref. No.: 092624.010200
)
Mark: EAR POLLUTION )
)
)
)
)
Assistant Commissioner for Trademarks
Post Office Box 1451
Alexandria, VA 22313-1451
BOX RESPONSES
NO FEE
RESPONSE TO NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION
Applicant Steven Goldstein (Applicant) hereby responds to the non-final Office
Action issued by the Examining Attorney on March 23, 2007. In the Office Action, the
Examining Attorney required amendments to the identification of goods, and a disclaimer
of exclusive rights to the wording Ear apart from the mark as shown. The Examining
Attorney also requested information clarifying the nature of the goods on which
Applicant intends to use its mark. Applicant responds to each of the requirements
individually below.
Likelihood of Confusion
Applicant notes with appreciation that the Examiner has found no similar
registered or pending marks which would bar registration.
Disclaimer
Applicant agrees to the required disclaimer of exclusive rights to EAR apart
from the Mark as shown. Applicant accordingly requests that the application be amended
to include the following statement:
No claim is made to the exclusive right to use EAR apart from the Mark as
shown.
Identification of Goods
The Examining Attorney has objected to the recitation of goods for being
indefinite. Please delete Identification of Goods in its entirety and substitute therefore:
International Class 9
Ear pieces for the filtration of unwanted noises to the ear.
The above amendment clarifies the nature of the computer services. Applicant
submits that the goods as presently defined are sufficiently definitive.
Request For Information
The Examining Attorney has requested that information be provided to more
clearly define the nature of the goods. Applicant submits that the goods are earpieces for
filtering unwanted noise and sounds from the ambient environment.
Evidence
In support of Applicant’s description Applicant attaches hereto as Exhibits A and
B printouts of web pages for similar goods.
Conclusion
As the foregoing satisfies all outstanding requirements regarding the application,
Applicant respectfully requests that the Examining Attorney approve the mark for
publication.
Respectfully submitted,
______/Richard E. Kurtz/_____________
Adam B. Landa
Wayne Harper
Attorneys for Applicant STEVEN GOLDSTEIN
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
1750 Tysons Boulevard
Suite 1200
McLean, Virginia 22102
Telephone: (407) 418-2356
Fax: (407) 650-8455