Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Waterfall Asset Management 85628481 (1) International Class 036: Financial services, namely, asset management services, investment

Waterfall Asset Management 85628481 (1) International Class 036: Financial services, namely, asset management services, investment

Ratings: (0)|Views: 20 |Likes:
Published by Mary Cochrane

The applicant has applied to register “WATERFALL ASSET MANAGEMENT” and design for

“Financial services, namely, asset management services, investment management services, asset advisory

services and investment advisory services.” The registered mark is “WATERFALL PROJECTIONS” for

“Financial services, namely, the provision of financial and investment information by means of printed

communications and by means of a global computer network

The applicant has applied to register “WATERFALL ASSET MANAGEMENT” and design for

“Financial services, namely, asset management services, investment management services, asset advisory

services and investment advisory services.” The registered mark is “WATERFALL PROJECTIONS” for

“Financial services, namely, the provision of financial and investment information by means of printed

communications and by means of a global computer network

More info:

Published by: Mary Cochrane on Dec 30, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/17/2013

pdf

text

original

 
To:
Waterfall Asset Management, LLC (tmindy@faegrebd.com)
Subject:
U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 85628481 - WATERFALLASSET MANAGEMENT - WAM-T0001e
Sent:
9/8/2012 6:35:36 PM
Sent As:
ECOM113@USPTO.GOV
Attachments:
Attachment - 1Attachment - 2Attachment - 3Attachment - 4Attachment - 5Attachment - 6Attachment - 7Attachment - 8Attachment - 9Attachment - 10Attachment - 11Attachment - 12Attachment - 13Attachment - 14Attachment - 15Attachment - 16Attachment - 17Attachment - 18Attachment - 19Attachment - 20Attachment - 21Attachment - 22Attachment - 23Attachment - 24Attachment - 25Attachment - 26Attachment - 27Attachment - 28Attachment - 29Attachment - 30Attachment - 31
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
 

APPLICATIONSERIAL NO.
 85628481
MARK
:WATERFALL ASSET MANAGEMENT
*85628481*

CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS
: MICHELLE KAISER BRAY FAEGRE BAKER DANIELS LLP 300 N MERIDIAN ST STE 2700 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46204-1750 
CLICK HERE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETT
http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/response_forms.j

APPLICANT
:  Waterfall Asset Management, LLC

CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO
: WAM-T0001e
CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS
: tmindy@faegrebd.com
OFFICE ACTION 
STRICT DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER
TO AVOID ABANDONMENT OF APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION, THE USPTO MUSTRECEIVE APPLICANT’S COMPLETE RESPONSE TO THIS LETTER
WITHIN 6 MONTHS
OF THEISSUE/MAILING DATE BELOW.
ISSUE/MAILING DATE:9/8/2012
The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney. Applicantmust 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
Ø
Section 2(d) Refusal-Likelihood of ConfusionØ
Disclaimer RequiredØ
Color Description ClarificationApplicant should note the following ground for refusal.
SECTION 2(d) REFUSAL – LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION
Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the mark in U.S.Registration No. 2825253. Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d);
see
TMEP §§1207.01
et seq.
See
the enclosed registration.The applicant has applied to register “WATERFALL ASSET MANAGEMENT” and design for
 
“Financial services, namely, asset management services, investment management services, asset advisoryservices and investment advisory services.” The registered mark is “WATERFALL PROJECTIONS” for“Financial services, namely, the provision of financial and investment information by means of printedcommunications and by means of a global computer network.”Trademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration of an applied-for mark that so resembles a registered mark that it is likely that a potential consumer would be confused or mistaken or deceived as to the source of thegoods and/or services of the applicant and registrant.
See
15 U.S.C. §1052(d). The court in
 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 beconsidered when determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion under Section 2(d).
See
TMEP§1207.01. However, not all the factors are necessarily relevant or of equal weight, and any one factor maybe dominant in a given case, depending upon the evidence of record.
Citigroup Inc. v. Capital City Bank Grp., Inc.
, 637 F.3d 1344,1355, 98 USPQ2d 1253, 1260 (Fed. Cir. 2011);
 In re Majestic Distilling Co.
,315 F.3d 1311, 1315, 65 USPQ2d 1201, 1204 (Fed. Cir. 2003);
see In re E. I. du Pont 
, 476 F.2d at 1361-62, 177 USPQ at 567.In this case, the following factors are the most relevant: similarity of the marks, similarity of the goodsand/or services, and similarity of trade channels of the goods and/or services.
See In re Dakin’s Miniatures Inc.
, 59 USPQ2d 1593 (TTAB 1999); TMEP §§1207.01
et seq.
Comparison of Marks
In a likelihood of confusion determination, the marks are compared for similarities in their appearance,sound, meaning or connotation, and commercial impression.
 In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.
, 476F.2d 1357, 1361, 177 USPQ 563, 567 (C.C.P.A. 1973); TMEP §1207.01(b)-(b)(v). Similarity in any oneof these elements may be sufficient to find the marks confusingly similar.
 In re White Swan Ltd.
, 8USPQ2d 1534, 1535 (TTAB 1988);
see In re 1st USA Realty Prof’ls, Inc.
, 84 USPQ2d 1581, 1586(TTAB 2007); TMEP §1207.01(b).In the present case, applicant’s mark “WATERFALL ASSET MANAGEMENT” and design and theregistered mark “WATERFALL PROJECTIONS” share the identical wording “WATERFALL.” Theidentical wording “WATERFALL” creates a similar overall commercial impression between the parties’marks.It is noted that the applied-for mark contains the additional wording “ASSET MANAGEMENT.”However, the wording “ASSET MANAGEMENT” merely describes a feature or use of applicant’sservice activities listed as “asset management services” in the identification of services. For this reason,applicant is required to disclaim this wording apart from the mark as a whole in the section entitled“Disclaimer Required” below.Furthermore, it is noted that the registered mark contains the additional wording “PROJECTIONS.However, registrant was required to disclaim this wording apart from the mark as a whole because it ismerely descriptive of a feature, characteristic and use of registrant’s services activities.Although marks are compared in their entireties, one feature of a mark may be more significant ordominant in creating a commercial impression.
See In re Viterra Inc.
, 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012);
 In re Nat’l Data Corp.
, 753 F.2d 1056, 1058, 224 USPQ 749, 751 (Fed. Cir.1985); TMEP §1207.01(b)(viii), (c)(ii). Disclaimed matter is typically less significant or less dominantwhen comparing marks.
See In re Dixie Rests., Inc.
, 105 F.3d 1405, 1407, 41 USPQ2d 1531, 1533-34(Fed. Cir. 1997);
 In re Nat’l Data Cor.
, 753 F.2d 1056, 1060, 224 USPQ 749, 752 (Fed. Cir. 1985);

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->