UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
`OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
`
`85154089
`
`*85154089*
`
`CLICK HERE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER:
`http://www.uspto.gov/teas/eTEASpageD.htm
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS:
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`1629 K ST NW STE 602
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`(cid:160) PANASONIC ELECTRIC WORKS
`
`(cid:160) (cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) APPLICATION SERIAL NO.(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) MARK: BL MOTOR(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)
`REINA KAKIMOTO(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)
`MOTS LAW. PLLC(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) APPLICANT:(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`WASHINGTON, DC 20006-1718(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)
`POWER TOOL CO., ETC.(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)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`PEW.051.0055(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160) CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS:(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`OFFICE ACTION
`
`STRICT DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER(cid:160)
`TO AVOID ABANDONMENT OF APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION, THE USPTO MUST RECEIVE APPLICANT’S COMPLETE
`RESPONSE TO THIS LETTER WITHIN 6 MONTHS OF THE ISSUE/MAILING DATE BELOW.
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`SSUE/MAILING DATE:
`
`The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney.(cid:160) Applicant must respond timely and completely to
`the issue(s) below.(cid:160) 15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62, 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.
`
`SECTION 2(d) REFUSAL – LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION
`
`(cid:160)R
`
`egistration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the mark in U.S. Registration Nos. 3281968, 3099713
`and 3084127.(cid:160) Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.(cid:160) See the enclosed registrations.
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`rademark 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 the goods and/or services of the applicant and registrant.(cid:160) See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).(cid:160)
`The court in In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (C.C.P.A. 1973) listed the principal factors to be considered
`when determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion under Section 2(d).(cid:160) See TMEP §1207.01.(cid:160) However, not all of the factors are
`necessarily relevant or of equal weight, and any one factor may be dominant in a given case, depending upon the evidence of record.(cid:160) 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.
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`n this case, the following factors are the most relevant:(cid:160) similarity of the marks, similarity of the goods and/or services, and similarity of trade
`channels of the goods and/or services.(cid:160) See In re Opus One, Inc., 60 USPQ2d 1812 (TTAB 2001); In re Dakin’s Miniatures Inc. , 59 USPQ2d
`1593 (TTAB 1999); In re Azteca Rest. Enters., Inc., 50 USPQ2d 1209 (TTAB 1999); TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he applicant has applied for registration of the proposed mark, BL MOTOR and design.(cid:160) The registrant’s mark are BL, BL and design and BL
`BEARINGS LIMITED EST. 1947 and design (BEARINGS LIMITED EST. 1947 is disclaimed).(cid:160) The registrations are owned by a single entity.
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`n a likelihood of confusion determination, the marks are compared for similarities in their appearance, sound, meaning or connotation and
`commercial impression.(cid:160) 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).(cid:160)
`Similarity in any one of these elements may be sufficient to find a likelihood of confusion.(cid:160) In re White Swan Ltd., 8 USPQ2d 1534, 1535 (TTAB
`1988); In re Lamson Oil Co., 6 USPQ2d 1041, 1043 (TTAB 1987); see TMEP §1207.01(b).
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`n the present case, the respective marks are highly similar in appearance, sound, commercial impression and connotation.(cid:160) Consumers are
`generally more inclined to focus on the first word, prefix or syllable in any trademark or service mark.(cid:160) See Palm Bay Imps., Inc. v. Veuve
`
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`

`
`Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee En 1772, 396 F. 3d 1369, 1372, 73 USPQ2d 1689, 1692 (Fed. Cir. 2005); see also Mattel Inc. v. Funline
`Merch. Co., 81 USPQ2d 1372, 1374-75 (TTAB 2006); Presto Prods., Inc. v. Nice-Pak Prods., Inc., 9 USPQ2d 1895, 1897 (TTAB 1988) (“it is
`often the first part of a mark which is most likely to be impressed upon the mind of a purchaser and remembered” when making purchasing
`decisions).(cid:160) Similarly, marks may be confusingly similar in appearance where there are similar terms or phrases or similar parts of terms or
`phrases appearing in both applicant’s and registrant’s mark.
`(cid:160) See Crocker Nat’l Bank v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce , 228 USPQ 689
`(TTAB 1986), aff’d sub nom. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Wells Fargo Bank, Nat’l Ass’n , 811 F.2d 1490, 1 USPQ2d 1813 (Fed.
`Cir. 1987) (COMMCASH and COMMUNICASH); In re Phillips-Van Heusen Corp., 228 USPQ 949 (TTAB 1986) (21 CLUB and “21” CLUB
`(stylized)); In re Corning Glass Works, 229 USPQ 65 (TTAB 1985) (CONFIRM and CONFIRMCELLS); In re Collegian Sportswear Inc., 224
`USPQ 174 (TTAB 1984) (COLLEGIAN OF CALIFORNIA and COLLEGIENNE); In re Pellerin Milnor Corp., 221 USPQ 558 (TTAB 1983)
`(MILTRON and MILLTRONICS); In re BASF A.G., 189 USPQ 424 (TTAB 1975) (LUTEXAL and LUTEX); TMEP §1207.01(b)(ii)-(iii).
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he marks are compared in their entireties under a Trademark Act Section 2(d) analysis.(cid:160) See TMEP §1207.01(b).(cid:160) Nevertheless, one feature of a
`mark may be recognized as more significant in creating a commercial impression.(cid:160) Greater weight is given to that dominant feature in
`determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion.(cid:160) In re Nat’l Data Corp. , 753 F.2d 1056, 224 USPQ 749 (Fed. Cir. 1985); Tektronix, Inc.
`v. Daktronics, Inc., 534 F.2d 915, 189 USPQ 693 (C.C.P.A. 1976); In re J.M. Originals Inc., 6 USPQ2d 1393 (TTAB 1987); see TMEP
`§1207.01(b)(viii), (c)(ii).
`
`(cid:160)W
`
`hen a mark consists of a word portion and a design portion, the word portion is more likely to be impressed upon a purchaser’s memory and
`to be used in calling for the goods and/or services.(cid:160) Therefore, the word portion is normally accorded greater weight in determining likelihood of
`confusion.(cid:160) In re Dakin’s Miniatures, Inc. , 59 USPQ2d 1593, 1596 (TTAB 1999); In re Appetito Provisions Co., 3 USPQ2d 1553, 1554 (TTAB
`1987); Amoco Oil Co. v. Amerco, Inc., 192 USPQ 729, 735 (TTAB 1976); TMEP §1207.01(c)(ii).
`
`(cid:160)A
`
`lthough a disclaimed portion of a mark certainly cannot be ignored, and the marks must be compared in their entireties, one feature of a mark
`may be more significant in creating a commercial impression. (cid:160) Disclaimed matter is typically less significant or less dominant when comparing
`marks.(cid:160) See In re Dixie Rests., Inc., 105 F.3d 1405, 1407, 41 USPQ2d 1531, 1533-34 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Nat’l Data Corp. , 753 F.2d 1056,
`1060, 224 USPQ 749, 752 (Fed. Cir. 1985); TMEP §1207.01(b)(viii), (c)(ii).
`
`(cid:160)W
`
`ith respect to the similarities of the goods/services of the parties, the goods of the applicant are identified as “Metalworking machine tools;
`lumbering, woodworking machines and apparatus; veneer making machines and apparatus; plywood making machines and apparatus; electric
`power tools, namely, rotary hammers, hammer drills/drivers, drills/drivers, impact wrenches, multi impact drivers, impact drivers, rotary
`hammer drills/drivers, jigsaws, multipurpose metal cutters, angle grinders, and reciprocating saws.” (cid:160) The goods of Registration No. 3281968 are
`identified as “machine parts, namely, bearings, bearing seals, bushings, belts, couplings, roller chain drives and roller chains, sprockets, pulleys,
`collars, clutches, retaining rings, brakes, mechanical seals, starters, electric motors, sheaves, hoses, v-belts, belt drives, gears, gear boxes, linear
`cam shafting, and pulleys; starters for motors and engines.” (cid:160) The services of Registration Nos. 3099713 and 3084127 are identified as “Retail
`
`store and distributorship services in the field of industrial and automotive products, not including chemical compositions.” (cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`The goods and/or services of the parties need not be identical or directly competitive to find a likelihood of confusion.(cid:160) See Safety-Kleen Corp. v.
`Dresser Indus., Inc., 518 F.2d 1399, 1404, 186 USPQ 476, 480 (C.C.P.A. 1975); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i).(cid:160) Rather, they need only be related in
`some manner, or the conditions surrounding their marketing are such that they would be encountered by the same purchasers under
`circumstances that would give rise to the mistaken belief that the goods and/or services come from a common source.(cid:160) In re Total Quality Group,
`Inc., 51 USPQ2d 1474, 1476 (TTAB 1999); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i); see, e.g., On-line Careline Inc. v. Am. Online Inc., 229 F.3d 1080, 1086-87,
`56 USPQ2d 1471, 1475-76 (Fed. Cir. 2000); In re Martin’s Famous Pastry Shoppe, Inc. , 748 F.2d 1565, 1566-68, 223 USPQ 1289, 1290 (Fed.
`Cir. 1984).
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`n the present case, the goods and services of the parties could well be presumed to be from the same source inasmuch as the goods of the
`services of the registrant could include parts relating to the goods of the applicant or store retail store and distributorship services relating to the
`applicant’s goods. (cid:160) Consumers are likely to be confused by the use of similar marks on or in connection with goods and with services featuring
`or related to those goods.(cid:160) TMEP §1207.01(a)(ii); see In re Hyper Shoppes (Ohio), Inc., 837 F.2d 463, 6 USPQ2d 1025 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (holding
`BIGG’S for retail grocery and general merchandise store services likely to be confused with BIGGS for furniture); In re United Serv. Distribs.,
`Inc., 229 USPQ 237 (TTAB 1986) (holding design for distributorship services in the field of health and beauty aids likely to be confused with
`design for skin cream); In re Phillips-Van Heusen Corp., 228 USPQ 949 (TTAB 1986) (holding 21 CLUB for various items of men’s, boys’,
`girls’ and women’s clothing likely to be confused with THE “21” CLUB (stylized) for restaurant services and towels);
`In re U.S. Shoe Corp.,
`229 USPQ 707 (TTAB 1985) (holding CAREER IMAGE (stylized) for retail women’s clothing store services and clothing likely to be confused
`with CREST CAREER IMAGES (stylized) for uniforms); Steelcase Inc. v. Steelcare Inc., 219 USPQ 433 (TTAB 1983) (holding STEELCARE
`INC. for refinishing of furniture, office furniture, and machinery likely to be confused with STEELCASE for office furniture and accessories);
`Mack Trucks, Inc. v. Huskie Freightways, Inc., 177 USPQ 32 (TTAB 1972) (holding similar marks for trucking services and on motor trucks and
`buses likely to cause confusion).
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he use of similar marks on or in connection with both products and retail-store services has been held likely to cause confusion where the
`evidence showed that the retail-store services featured the same type of products.(cid:160) See In re Thomas, 79 USPQ2d 1021, 1023 (TTAB 2006)
`(holding the use of similar marks both for jewelry and for retail-jewelry and mineral-store services was likely to cause confusion); In re Peebles
`
`

`
`Inc., 23 USPQ2d 1795, 1796 (TTAB 1992) (holding the use of nearly identical marks both for coats and for retail outlets featuring camping and
`mountain climbing equipment, including coats, was likely to cause confusion, noting that “there is no question that store services and the goods
`which may be sold in that store are related goods and services for the purpose of determining likelihood of confusion”); In re U.S. Shoe Corp., 8
`USPQ2d 1938, 1939 (TTAB 1988) (holding the use of nearly identical marks both for leather cowboy boots and for retail western-, outdoor-, and
`leisure-clothing-store services featuring boots was likely to cause confusion); TMEP §1207.01(a)(ii).
`
`(cid:160)C
`
`onsequently, the goods and services of the present parties clearly move in the same normal channels of trade, are available to all potential
`
`customers and may be utilized for the same or similar (i.e., related) purposes by the same classes of purchasers.(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`Accordingly, based on the highly similar nature of the marks and the similarity of the goods and services of the parties, there is a likelihood of
`confusion under Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act.
`
`(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 informalities.
`
`(cid:160)I
`
`DENTIFICATION OF GOODS
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified because as worded, the exact nature of some of the goods are unclear.(cid:160) Moreover,
`in the instant case, the word “apparatus” in the identification of goods is indefinite and must be clarified because it is too broad and could refer
`to goods in more than one international class.(cid:160) Applicant must amend the identification by stating the common generic name of each item or by
`describing the nature, purpose and intended use of each item.(cid:160) See TMEP §§1402.01, 1402.03.(cid:160) The applicant may also wish to delete the term
`entirely from the identification.
`
`(cid:160)A
`
`pplicant may adopt the following identification, if accurate:(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)
`multipurpose metal cutters, angle grinders and reciprocating saws,” in International Class 7. (cid:160)(cid:160)
`See TMEP §1402.01.(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`“Metalworking machine tools; lumbering, woodworking, veneer or plywood making machines; electric power tools, namely, rotary
`hammers, hammer drills and drivers, impact wrenches, multi impact drivers, impact drivers, rotary hammer drills and drivers, jigsaws,
`
`Identifications of goods can be amended only to clarify or limit the goods; adding to or broadening the scope of the goods is not permitted.(cid:160) 37
`C.F.R. §2.71(a); see TMEP §§1402.06 et seq., 1402.07.(cid:160) Therefore, applicant may not amend the identification to include goods that are not
`within the scope of the goods set forth in the present identification.
`
`(cid:160)F
`
`or assistance with identifying and classifying goods and/or services in trademark applications, please see the online searchable Manual of
`Acceptable Identifications of Goods and Services at http://tess2.uspto.gov/netahtml/tidm.html.(cid:160) See TMEP §1402.04.
`
`(cid:160)D
`
`ISCLAIMER - GOODS
`
`(cid:160)A
`
`pplicant must disclaim the descriptive wording “MOTOR” apart from the mark as shown. (cid:160) Trademark Act Section 6, 15 U.S.C. §1056; TMEP
`§§1213 and 1213.03(a).(cid:160) The word is descriptive because it merely describes a characteristic, function, feature, purpose or use of the relevant
`goods.(cid:160) The goods are power tools which feature a motor.
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he computerized printing format for the Office’s Trademark Official Gazette requires a standardized format for a disclaimer.(cid:160) TMEP
`§1213.08(a)(i).(cid:160) The following is the standard format used by the Office:
`
`No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “MOTOR” apart from the mark as shown.
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`MEP §1213.08(a)(i); see In re Owatonna Tool Co., 231 USPQ 493 (Comm’r Pats. 1983).
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he Office can require an applicant to disclaim an unregistrable part of a mark consisting of particular wording, symbols, numbers, design
`elements or combinations thereof.(cid:160) 15 U.S.C. §1056(a).(cid:160) Under Trademark Act Section 2(e), the Office can refuse registration of an entire mark
`if the entire mark is merely descriptive, deceptively misdescriptive, or primarily geographically descriptive of the goods.(cid:160) 15 U.S.C. §1052(e).(cid:160)
`Thus, the Office may require an applicant to disclaim a portion of a mark that, when used in connection with the goods, is merely descriptive,
`
`deceptively misdescriptive, primarily geographically descriptive, or otherwise unregistrable (e.g., generic).(cid:160) See TMEP §§1213, 1213.03.(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`Failure to comply with a disclaimer requirement can result in a refusal to register the entire mark.(cid:160) TMEP §1213.01(b).
`
`(cid:160)
`(cid:160)
`

`
`A “disclaimer” is a statement that applicant does not claim exclusive rights to an unregistrable component of a mark. (cid:160) TMEP §1213.(cid:160) A
`
`disclaimer does not affect the appearance of the applied-for mark.(cid:160) See TMEP §1213.10.(cid:160)(cid:160)
`GENERAL INQUIRY ON SIGNIFICANCE
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he applicant must indicate whether “BL” has any significance in the relevant trade. (cid:160) 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b).
`
`(cid:160)N
`
`O CONFLICTING MARKS NOTED
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`he Office records have been searched and there are no similar registered or pending marks that would bar registration under Trademark Act
`Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d). TMEP §704.02.
`
`(cid:160)P
`
`LEASE NOTE:(cid:160) Because it delays processing, submission of duplicate papers is discouraged.(cid:160) Unless specifically requested to do so by the
`Office, parties should not mail follow up copies of documents transmitted by fax.(cid:160) Cf. ITC Entertainment Group Ltd. V. Nintendo of America Inc.
`45 USPQ2d 2021 (TTAB 1998).
`
`Howard Smiga /hs/
`Trademark Attorney
`Law Office 102
`571-272-9220 Office
`571-273-9102 Fax
`
`(cid:160)(cid:160)(cid:160)
`
`TO RESPOND TO THIS LETTER: (cid:160) Use the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) response form at
`http://teasroa.uspto.gov/roa/.(cid:160) Please wait 48-72 hours from the issue/mailing date before using TEAS, to allow for necessary system updates of
`the application.(cid:160) For technical assistance with online forms, e-mail TEAS@uspto.gov.
`
`(cid:160)W
`
`HO MUST SIGN THE RESPONSE:(cid:160) It must be personally signed by(cid:160)an individual applicant or(cid:160)someone with legal authority to bind an
`applicant (i.e., a corporate officer, a general partner, all joint applicants).(cid:160)(cid:160)If an applicant is represented by an attorney, the attorney must sign the
`
`response.(cid:160)(cid:160)
`PERIODICALLY CHECK THE STATUS OF THE APPLICATION: (cid:160) To ensure that applicant does not miss crucial deadlines or official
`notices, check the status of the application every three to four months using Trademark Applications and Registrations Retrieval (TARR) at
`http://tarr.uspto.gov/. (cid:160) Please keep a copy of the complete TARR screen. (cid:160) If TARR shows no change for more than six months, call
`1-800-786-9199. (cid:160) For more information on checking status, see http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/process/status/.
`
`(cid:160)T
`
`O UPDATE CORRESPONDENCE/E-MAIL ADDRESS:(cid:160) Use the TEAS form at http://www.uspto.gov/teas/eTEASpageE.htm.
`
`(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)
`

`
`Print: Nov 22, 2010
`
`T660424-3
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`16604243
`
`Status
`REGISTERED
`
`Word Marl:
`BL BEARINGS LIMITED EST. 1947
`
`Standard Character Mark
`No
`
`Registration NI.II"I'IhBf
`3084127
`
`Date Registered
`2006fO4f25
`
`Type of Mark
`SERVICE MARI-C
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[3] DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS ANDJOR NUMBERS
`
`U'WI1Bf
`Bearings Limited CORPORATION NEW YORK 20 Davids Drive Hauppsuge NEW
`YORK llT88
`
`Goodsise-wines
`Class Status —— ACTIVE.
`
`IC 035.
`
`US
`
`100 lOl
`
`lO2.
`
`G & S: Retail
`
`store and distributorship services in the field of industrial and
`automotive products, not
`including chemical compositions. First Use:
`l985/O2fll. First Use In Commerce:
`l985/O2/ll.
`
`Disclaimer Statement
`No CLAIM IS MADE To THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT To USE "BEARINGS LIMITED EST.
`l947" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN.
`
`Lining!5tipp|ing Statement
`The lining shown in the mark is an element of the mark and is not
`intended to depict shading.
`
`Filing Date
`2UU4fUTf2T
`
`Examining Attorney
`
`

`
`Print: Nov 22, 2010
`
`T660-I-24-3
`
`OSLICK,SCOTT
`
`Attorney of Record
`Elisabeth A. Langworthy
`
`

`
`

`
`Print: Nov 22, 2010
`
`?fiIEtl-I-244
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`16604244
`
`Status
`REGISTERED
`
`Word Mark
`BL
`
`Standard Character Mark
`No
`
`Registration NI.II"I'IhBf
`3099713
`
`Date Registered
`2006fO6fO6
`
`Type of Mark
`sERvIcE MP.RI-C
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[3] DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS ANDJOR NUMBERS
`
`U'WI1Bf
`Bearings Limited CORPORATION NEW YORK 20 Davids Drive Hauppauge NEW
`YORK l1T88
`
`Goodslse-wines
`Class Status —— ACTIVE.
`
`IC 035.
`
`US
`
`100 101 102.
`
`G & S: Retail
`
`store and distributorship services in the field of industrial and
`automotive products, not
`including chemical compositions. First Use:
`1985/O2fll. First Use In Commerce: 1985/O2/ll.
`
`Liningfstippling Statement
`The lining shown in the mark is an element of the mark and is not
`intended to depict shading.
`
`Description of Mark
`The mark consists of the stylized lettering "BL" in a circular border
`with horizontal "speed" lining appearing across the letter "L". The
`_etter "L" appears in yellow across a black background.
`
`Colors Clalmad
`The colors yellow and black are claimed as a feature of the mark.
`
`-1-
`
`

`
`Print: Nov 22, 2010
`
`?fi6tl-I-244
`
`Filing Date
`2004fU?H2?
`
`Examining Attorney
`OSLICK,SCOTT
`
`Attorney of Record
`Elisabeth A. Langworthy
`
`

`
`

`
`Print: Nov 22, 2010
`
`T703134-G
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`11031346
`
`Status
`REGISTERED
`
`Word Marl:
`BL
`
`Standard Character Mark
`Yes
`
`Registration NI.II"I'IhBf
`3281968
`
`Date Registered
`2001fO8f21
`
`Type of Mark
`TRADEMARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`[4]
`STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
`
`U'WI1Bf
`Bearings Limited CORPORATION NEW YORK 20 Davids Drive Hauppauge NEW
`YORK 11188
`
`Goodslservices
`Class Status —— ACTIVE.
`
`IC 001.
`
`US
`
`O13 O19 O21 O23 O31 O34 035.
`
`G
`
`& 8: machine parts, namely, bearings, bearing seals, bushings, belts,
`couplings, roller chain drives and roller chains, sprockets, pulleys,
`collars, clutches, retaining rings, brakes, mechanical seals,
`starters, electric motors, sheaves, hoses, v—belts, belt drives,
`gears, gear boxes,
`linear cam shafting, and pulleys; starters for
`motors and engines. First Use: 1985fO2fll. First Use In Commerce:
`1985fO2f11.
`
`Filing Date
`Zflflfifllfflfi
`
`Examining Attorney
`LoRENEo, GEoRGE
`
`Attorney of Record
`David E. Weslow
`
`

`
`BL