• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

Rösti
Member
(01-21-2016, 02:59 PM)
Rösti's Avatar

The USPTO keeps unravelling its office actions.

On December 23, 2015, two trademarks regarding Electronic Arts' puzzle platformer Unravel were abdoned as EA failed to respond to an office action by the USPTO. An abandonment notice was mailed on January 19, 2016. The two trademarks filings are US serial number 86564978, Unravel, for goods and services "Computer game software" and US serial number 86564980, Unravel, for goods and services "Entertainment services, namely, providing an on-line computer game". What was this office action then?

Well, on June 22, 2015, the USPTO issued an office action against EA's filings on these grounds:

Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the mark in U.S. Registration No. 4227793. Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.

Sources: http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=86...e=statusSearch http://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer...Index=0&page=1

U.S. Registration No. 4227793, "Unravel", is hold by SimplyFun, a board game company, and regards a board game called "Beary's Unravel Game", which offers kids the opportunity to practice holding attention and mentally trace a path in their heads.



Let's take a look at what else the USPTO had to say about this (the whole document is 123 pages long, so I won't post all of it):

Trademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration of an applied-for mark that so resembles a registered mark that it is likely a potential consumer would be confused, mistaken, or deceived as to the source of the goods and/or services of the applicant and registrant. See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d). A determination of likelihood of confusion under Section 2(d) is made on a case-by case basis and the factors set forth in In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973) aid in this determination. Citigroup Inc. v. Capital City Bank Grp., Inc., 637 F.3d 1344, 1349, 98 USPQ2d 1253, 1256 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (citing On-Line Careline, Inc. v. Am. Online, Inc., 229 F.3d 1080, 1085, 56 USPQ2d 1471, 1474 (Fed. Cir. 2000)). Not all the du Pont factors, however, are necessarily relevant or of equal weight, and any one of the factors may control in a given case, depending upon the evidence of record. Citigroup Inc. v. Capital City Bank Grp., Inc., 637 F.3d at 1355, 98 USPQ2d at 1260; In re Majestic Distilling Co., 315 F.3d 1311, 1315, 65 USPQ2d 1201, 1204 (Fed. Cir. 2003); see In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 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 and nature of the goods and/or services, and similarity of the trade channels of the goods and/or services. See In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1361-62, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Dakin’s Miniatures Inc., 59 USPQ2d 1593, 1595-96 (TTAB 1999); TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.

In any likelihood of confusion determination, two key considerations are similarity of the marks and similarity or relatedness of the goods and/or services. Syndicat Des Proprietaires Viticulteurs De Chateauneuf-Du-Pape v. Pasquier DesVignes, 107 USPQ2d 1930, 1938 (TTAB 2013) (citing Federated Foods, Inc. v. Fort Howard Paper Co., 544 F.2d 1098, 1103, 192 USPQ 24, 29 (C.C.P.A. 1976)); In re Iolo Techs., LLC, 95 USPQ2d 1498, 1499 (TTAB 2010); see TMEP §1207.01. That is, the marks are compared in their entireties for similarities in appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression. In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting 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). Additionally, the goods and/or services are compared to determine whether they are similar or 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, (a)(vi).

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 White Swan Ltd., 8 USPQ2d 1534, 1535 (TTAB 1988); In re 1st USA Realty Prof’ls, Inc., 84 USPQ2d 1581, 1586 (TTAB 2007)); TMEP §1207.01(b).

When comparing marks, the test is not whether the marks can be distinguished in a side-by-side comparison, but rather whether the marks are sufficiently similar in terms of their overall commercial impression that confusion as to the source of the goods and/or services offered under the respective marks is likely to result. Midwestern Pet Foods, Inc. v. Societe des Produits Nestle S.A., 685 F.3d 1046, 1053, 103 USPQ2d 1435, 1440 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Davia, 110 USPQ2d 1810, 1813 (TTAB 2014); TMEP §1207.01(b). The proper focus is on the recollection of the average purchaser, who retains a general rather than specific impression of trademarks. United Global Media Grp., Inc. v. Tseng, 112 USPQ2d 1039, 1049, (TTAB 2014); L’Oreal S.A. v. Marcon, 102 USPQ2d 1434, 1438 (TTAB 2012); TMEP §1207.01(b).

The applicant’s mark, “UNRAVEL” is identical to the registrant’s mark, “UNRAVEL”, and will lead to consumer confusion

Comparison of the Goods and Services

When determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion, all circumstances surrounding the sale of the goods and/or services are considered. Industrial Nucleonics Corp. v. Hinde, 475 F.2d 1197, 177 USPQ 386 (C.C.P.A. 1973). These circumstances include the marketing channels, the identity of the prospective purchasers and the degree of similarity between the marks and between the goods and/or services. In comparing the marks, similarity in any one of the elements of sound, appearance or meaning is sufficient to find a likelihood of confusion. In comparing the goods and/or services, it is necessary to show that they are related in some manner. In re Mack, 197 USPQ 755, 757 (TTAB 1977); TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.

The goods and/or services of the parties 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) (“[E]ven if the goods in question are different from, and thus not related to, one another in kind, the same goods can be related in the mind of the consuming public as to the origin of the goods.”); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i).

The respective goods and/or services need only be “related in some manner and/or if the circumstances surrounding their marketing [be] 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).

If the marks of the respective parties are identical, the relationship between the goods or services of the respective parties need not be as close to support a finding of likelihood of confusion as might apply where differences exist between the marks. Century 21 Real Estate Corp. v. Century Life of America, 970 F.2d 874, 877, 23 USPQ2d 1698, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 1992), cert. denied 506 U.S. 1034 (1992); In re Opus One Inc., 60 USPQ2d 1812, 1815 (TTAB 2001); Amcor, Inc. v. Amcor Industries, Inc., 210 USPQ 70 (TTAB 1981); TMEP §1207.01(a).

The applicant’s goods are “Computer game software; Downloadable computer game software via a global computer network and wireless devices; Video game software.”

The registrant’s goods are “board games; games, namely, educational games and parlor games using tiles.”

Source: http://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer...Index=1&page=1

Could we perhaps be seeing a new name for this game?

Unravel me if old.
Last edited by Rösti; 01-21-2016 at 03:44 PM.
iMax
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:00 PM)
iMax's Avatar
Just call it Yarny. Everyone else does.
Deft Beck
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:00 PM)
Deft Beck's Avatar
Yarny's Adventure incoming.
GHG
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:01 PM)
GHG's Avatar
So is this game getting cancelled?

Would be a shame as it looked pretty cool and unique.
Corpekata
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:01 PM)
Corpekata's Avatar
They've been pushing Yarny and using his name so often in the press for the game that I don't think they'd be harmed too much by just changing the name to that.
chadskin
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:01 PM)
chadskin's Avatar
Yarny's Woolly World is a safe bet, EA, go for it.
Rösti
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:02 PM)
Rösti's Avatar

Originally Posted by GHG

So is this game getting cancelled?

Would be a shame as it looked pretty cool and unique.

Trademark abandonment doesn't equal game cancellation. As I suggested, the game could simply be getting a new name.
fenners
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:02 PM)
fenners's Avatar

Originally Posted by GHG

So is this game getting cancelled?

No.
Diablohead
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:03 PM)
Diablohead's Avatar
Yarni's island
GHG
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:03 PM)
GHG's Avatar

Originally Posted by Rösti

Trademark abandonment doesn't equal game cancellation. As I suggested, the game could simply be getting a new name.

Originally Posted by fenners

No.

Ok good.
maxcriden
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:03 PM)
maxcriden's Avatar
At first I thought those black eyes were kinda off-putting but they've grown on me. In the second image, I mean. That bunny is cute.
ekim
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:04 PM)
ekim's Avatar
Rename it to ungarble or disentangle
foxbeldin
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:04 PM)
foxbeldin's Avatar
They're gonna call it Unraveled, aren't they?
Alcoholikaust
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:05 PM)
Alcoholikaust's Avatar
Untangled? Yarney?

new name it
nbnt
is responsible for the well-being of this island.
(01-21-2016, 03:07 PM)
nbnt's Avatar
Fuck please don't tell me this will result in a delay. :(
maxcriden
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:08 PM)
maxcriden's Avatar
Hopefully the release date doesn't come apart at the seams.
MrPressStart
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:08 PM)
MrPressStart's Avatar
Game looks really cool and I am going to give it a try.
BrettHeazy
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:09 PM)
BrettHeazy's Avatar
Surely they can still hold the name Unravel, but they're just liable to loosing a shed-load of dollar from that board game company?
LKSmash
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:09 PM)
LKSmash's Avatar

Originally Posted by maxcriden

Hopefully the release date doesn't come apart at the seams.

Platinum Mad
Junior Member
(01-21-2016, 03:10 PM)
Platinum Mad's Avatar
Yarneys Untanglement
Graphics Horse
graphics horse
graphics horse
does whatever a
graphics horse does
(01-21-2016, 03:11 PM)
Graphics Horse's Avatar
The Chronicles of Yarnia
RoKKeR
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:13 PM)
RoKKeR's Avatar

Originally Posted by Graphics Horse

The Chronicles of Yarnia

Lol. This gets my vote
Phoenix Fang
Banned
(01-21-2016, 03:14 PM)
Maybe someone can explain it to me but EA wasn't even filing in the same class as the one Simply Fun is in. Also if you do a search there are other companies using the name Unravel also. So what exactly was the problem?
Lulubop
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:15 PM)
Lulubop's Avatar
Unraveled: Epic Yarny's Woolly World.
Daedardus
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:18 PM)
Daedardus's Avatar
The most interesting part is that someone's job is to write 123 pages about cases as these. And I understand nothing from it. Most likely partial copypaste, but it still needs to be checked on correctness.
Venom Fox
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:21 PM)
Venom Fox's Avatar

Originally Posted by chadskin

Yarny's Woolly World is a safe bet, EA, go for it.

Originally Posted by Diablohead

Yarni's island

Originally Posted by Graphics Horse

The Chronicles of Yarnia

/Dead

Shame about the name though, something they should have researched before committing to it.
Nibel
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:30 PM)
Nibel's Avatar
Yarn Yarny
Alcoholikaust
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:31 PM)
Alcoholikaust's Avatar

EA still tweeting this -live from 4 or 5 minutes ago

edit:maybe they will just use it and pay for it?
Shaanyboi
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:32 PM)
Shaanyboi's Avatar
Yar(ny)s Revenge
TM94
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:32 PM)
TM94's Avatar
Battlefield 6
BlastProcessing
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:33 PM)
BlastProcessing's Avatar
Yarny's Trenched
Alcoholikaust
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:37 PM)
Alcoholikaust's Avatar

Originally Posted by Shaanyboi

Yar(ny)s Revenge

Yarney's Revengeance
oti xero
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:39 PM)
oti xero's Avatar
BloodYorne
tebunker
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:40 PM)
tebunker's Avatar
Yarney Destroyer of Worlds, Eater of Souls, The Yarnmegeddon.

These things write themselves
LordAmused
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:41 PM)
LordAmused's Avatar

Originally Posted by Rösti


Well, on June 22, 2016, the USPTO issued an office action against EA's filings on these grounds:

The date should be Jan 19, 2016, if I'm reading the source page right. Just pointing that out.

The Yarnmegeddon sounds good, Tebunker :)
Last edited by LordAmused; 01-21-2016 at 03:44 PM.
RyanPierre
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:45 PM)
RyanPierre's Avatar

Originally Posted by LordAmused

The date should be Jan 19, 2016, if I'm reading the source page right.

Hey, let's not be so quick to discount the possibility that this occurred in the future.
kevin1025
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:46 PM)
kevin1025's Avatar
So the game might get a name change two and a half weeks before release? I hope that doesn't hurt any sales, the game looks great!
Rösti
Member
(01-21-2016, 03:46 PM)
Rösti's Avatar

Originally Posted by LordAmused

The date should be Jan 19, 2016, if I'm reading the source page right. Just pointing that out.

The Yarnmegeddon sounds good, Tebunker :)

The notification of abandonment is Jan 19, 2016. The initial office action is June 22, 2015 (not 2016 as I had originally out of accident written). Thanks for the notice.
Tatsumi Oga
Member
(01-21-2016, 04:18 PM)
Tatsumi Oga's Avatar
Of course no cancellation but could it be delayed now?
PSqueak
Member
(01-21-2016, 04:25 PM)
PSqueak's Avatar
EA presents EA's Unravel by EA.


You have to call it the whole thing every time.
masq
Junior Member
(01-21-2016, 04:29 PM)
masq's Avatar
whoops
Grover
Banned
(01-21-2016, 04:29 PM)
they could just add an "ED" at the end and call it Unraveled?
NHale
Member
(01-21-2016, 07:22 PM)
NHale's Avatar
Just rename it King's Yarny Saga. Safe bet imho.
KazenY2J
Member
(01-21-2016, 07:31 PM)
KazenY2J's Avatar
Unraveled: Yarny's Fortune
Easy_D
never left the stone age
(01-21-2016, 07:46 PM)
Easy_D's Avatar
edit: dp
Easy_D
never left the stone age
(01-21-2016, 07:47 PM)
Easy_D's Avatar

Originally Posted by Phoenix Fang

Maybe someone can explain it to me but EA wasn't even filing in the same class as the one Simply Fun is in. Also if you do a search there are other companies using the name Unravel also. So what exactly was the problem?

Trying to go after big $$$

Originally Posted by NHale

Just rename it King's Yarny Saga. Safe bet imho.

The Knitting Pattern Scrolls
Iksenpets
this avi makes no sense
(01-21-2016, 07:50 PM)
Iksenpets's Avatar
Yarn Brigade.
GribbleGrunger
Junior Member
(01-21-2016, 07:52 PM)
GribbleGrunger's Avatar
A Stitch In Time
Knit Pick
Untangle
Threads
InsaneTiger
Member
(01-21-2016, 07:53 PM)
InsaneTiger's Avatar
Slipknot
Dr Campino
Member
(01-21-2016, 07:55 PM)
Dr Campino's Avatar
Infinite Unravelling

Thread Tools