Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Apr 8, 2013, 01:43 AM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
U.S. Patent Office Withdraws Primary Objections to Apple's 'iPad Mini' Trademark Application




Last week, we noted that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) had issued an initial office action denying Apple's application for a trademark on the term "iPad mini".

The examiner's primary objection to Apple's application related to all of the elements of the "iPad mini" name having been judged as descriptive rather than contributing to a unique product name. A second objection related to Apple's use of the iPad mini overview page as its specimen proving that the named product was being offered for sale.

At the time, we noted that a resolution to the issue would likely be relatively straightforward, with Apple simply needing to show that the "iPad mini" term was an extension of its already distinctive "iPad" trademark and submit a new specimen satisfying the examiner's objection.

Based on a newly published office action from the USPTO, dated last Wednesday, the issue has in fact mostly been resolved without Apple having had to address the examiner's objections. Presumably responding to the publicity surrounding the initial decision, the USPTO has preemptively withdrawn its two main objections to Apple's objections.
Quote:
This Office action supersedes any previous Office action issued in connection with this application.

Upon further review of the application, the examining attorney has determined that the following refusals issued in the initial Office action should be withdrawn. The examining attorney apologizes for any inconvenience caused.

REFUSALS WITHDRAWN:

The Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1) descriptiveness refusal and the Sections 1 and 45 specimen refusal are both withdrawn.
The new document continues to alert Apple to several other issues with the trademark application, including potential refusal should earlier pending applications from other companies seeking to protect the names of their electronics products with "mini" in them end up being granted. No action on this issue is, however, required by Apple at this time.

The document also holds firm on the requirement that Apple add a disclaimer to its application noting that it only seeks to protect the term "mini" when used as part of the "iPad mini" name. The disclaimer would allow other companies to use the "mini" term in their own product names.

Article Link: U.S. Patent Office Withdraws Primary Objections to Apple's 'iPad Mini' Trademark Application
MacRumors is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 01:48 AM   #2
SmokyD
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Darn, well I guess this means I can't name my next child "iPad Mini" after all. Had my hopes up.
SmokyD is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 01:55 AM   #3
goobot
macrumors 68040
 
goobot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: long island NY
The reviewer was stupid anyway, I can understand the whole mini thing but seriously complaining that the buy button on the site wasn't to his liking?.
__________________
Black ipod classic|Black iPhone 3g|Unibody Macbook |White iPhone 3g S⃣ |iPad|Black iPhone 4|Apple TV 2|White iPhone 4 S⃣ |Black iPhone 5|Black iPhone 5 S⃣
goobot is offline   10 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 02:04 AM   #4
sundog925
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Yawn. Wake me up tomorrow with good news!
sundog925 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 02:30 AM   #5
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Premià de Mar
Ah, those objections were real and not an April's Fools prank?
__________________
There are four kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, statistics, and analyst projections.
Oletros is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 02:40 AM   #6
gnasher729
macrumors G5
 
gnasher729's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
Ah, those objections were real and not an April's Fools prank?
Seems they were both real and an April's fool prank at the same time, since the USPTO withdrew them without Apple doing anything. The "i = internet" was nonsense, as shown by 200 million iPods without internet access. "Small iPad" or "8" iPad" would be descriptive, "iPad Mini" which less so. And claiming that a whole page advert for an iPad Mini with a "Buy now" button doesn't show the iPad Mini is for sale, that's nonsense.

So I suppose someone pranked his collegues at the USPTO, and everyone else. Of course everything the USPTO does is by definition "real".
gnasher729 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 02:48 AM   #7
mabhatter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
The sin objection is they don't wan Apple claiming "mini" was trademarked. Right now Apple clearly marks things "iPad mini" but we know how Apple loves to change its mind and start revoking names that accessory makers use to bend its trademark standing.

So when Samsung comes out with the Galaxy Tab mini.... (Smaller than the Tab but bigger than the Note) the PTO wants to lay down precedent they WEREN'T granting Apple exclusive use if "mini".
mabhatter is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 02:49 AM   #8
japanime
macrumors 65816
 
japanime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Japan
As someone who has had several trademark applications initially denied, and later approved, this comes as no surprise. The USPTO works in mysterious ways.
__________________
Put Manga University in your pocket — get our free iPhone app!
japanime is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 03:58 AM   #9
KPOM
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by japanime View Post
As someone who has had several trademark applications initially denied, and later approved, this comes as no surprise. The USPTO works in mysterious ways.
It comes across as arbitrary, which is not how a government agency should act.
KPOM is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 04:08 AM   #10
tdream
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
USTPO's check arrived in the post. Alright lads, clear it.
__________________
rMacbook Pro 2.6 4G 32GB 3G 16GB iTouch 1G 32GB Mini 1.6 iPad 3 64GB
Moto G | Sony Vaio Flip 15A
tdream is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 04:33 AM   #11
MacDav
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Typical Government bureaucracy. Government can't even deliver mail without going into billions of debt every year. More and bigger Government is what we need.
MacDav is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 04:42 AM   #12
Lennholm
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Doesn't Apple already have a trademark for "iPad"? If so, why would they not be granted a trademark for the full term "iPad Mini" but more importantly, why would they need it? Shouldn't the trademark for "iPad" already cover every conceivable derivative term that includes "iPad"?
Apple didn't try to trademark the term "mini", did they?
Lennholm is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 04:50 AM   #13
NutsNGum
macrumors 68030
 
NutsNGum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacDav View Post
Typical Government bureaucracy. Government can't even deliver mail without going into billions of debt every year. More and bigger Government is what we need.
PRSI is that-a-way.

<======
NutsNGum is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 05:17 AM   #14
bushido
macrumors 601
 
bushido's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: España y Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lennholm View Post
Doesn't Apple already have a trademark for "iPad"? If so, why would they not be granted a trademark for the full term "iPad Mini" but more importantly, why would they need it? Shouldn't the trademark for "iPad" already cover every conceivable derivative term that includes "iPad"?
Apple didn't try to trademark the term "mini", did they?
i dont get it either. did they trademark the "pro" of the macbook pro too? its not like someone could use the term macbook or iPad in that case in the first place so why bother with the mini combo.
__________________
¡No hables a menos que puedas mejorar el silencio!
bushido is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 05:41 AM   #15
KohPhiPhi
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
As of lately, it seems like Apple hits the headlines more because of legal/patent issues than because of their products
__________________
13" MBA + 27" apple display... the perfect combo!
Best of both worlds: top mobility on the road and top screen real state at home!

Last edited by KohPhiPhi; Apr 8, 2013 at 06:01 AM.
KohPhiPhi is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 06:03 AM   #16
Howard81
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
So maybe Apple should be playing loyalties to British Motor Corporation / British Leyland / Rover / BMW after all, they invented the word Mini with the Morris Mini-Minor back in 1959...
Howard81 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 06:07 AM   #17
Nuvi
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lennholm View Post
Doesn't Apple already have a trademark for "iPad"? If so, why would they not be granted a trademark for the full term "iPad Mini" but more importantly, why would they need it? Shouldn't the trademark for "iPad" already cover every conceivable derivative term that includes "iPad"?
Apple didn't try to trademark the term "mini", did they?
I believe one of main issues here was that the trade mark was too wide and didn't specify that trademark registration only applied to "iPad Mini" and not to "Mini". Therefore, Apple needs to add disclaimer in their application so that only iPad Mini is registered and not just "Mini" without "iPad". IMHO, if Apple could get away with original registration they would probably be suing Samsung for every single "Mini" product they have released. Therefore, the additional disclaimer is truly needed since descriptive general term like "Mini" can't be registered. If it could then the trademark should be given to Morris Mini.
Nuvi is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 06:31 AM   #18
Laucian Nailor
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Common sense prevails
Laucian Nailor is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 06:38 AM   #19
BvizioN
macrumors 68000
 
BvizioN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Manchester, UK
Send a message via Skype™ to BvizioN
Quote:
Originally Posted by mabhatter View Post
So when Samsung comes out with the Galaxy Tab mini.... (Smaller than the Tab but bigger than the Note)
Hasn't Samsung already come up with million sizes?
__________________
Born Albanian.
BvizioN is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 06:55 AM   #20
Kaibelf
macrumors 6502a
 
Kaibelf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokyD View Post
Darn, well I guess this means I can't name my next child "iPad Mini" after all. Had my hopes up.
Since this is about commercial trademarks, were you intending to sell your child?
Kaibelf is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 06:59 AM   #21
GenesisST
macrumors 65816
 
GenesisST's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Where I live
I still don't get the need to trademark "iPad mini" when you already have iPad... If I were to call something "iPad whatever", wouldn't I be infringing on the iPad trademark anyways?
__________________
Kenmore microwave, Frigidaire oven, Fisher & Paykel fridge, LG washer & Dryer and Crane toilet
GenesisST is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 07:03 AM   #22
Nuvi
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by GenesisST View Post
I still don't get the need to trademark "iPad mini" when you already have iPad... If I were to call something "iPad whatever", wouldn't I be infringing on the iPad trademark anyways?
Sure but it seems Apple wanted to have very wide trademark and wanted to also "protect" Mini without term "iPad" front of it. Hence, Apple needs to add disclaimer clarifying that this trademark doesn't include "Mini" without word iPad.
Nuvi is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 07:05 AM   #23
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
What? No one is going to accuse Apple of slipping the USPO an envelope of cash "to forget this whole thing" ?
samcraig is online now   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 07:09 AM   #24
JAQ
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Purgatory MI
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacDav View Post
Typical Government bureaucracy. Government can't even deliver mail without going into billions of debt every year. More and bigger Government is what we need.
Been watching Fox News ("lies for the gullible") again?
JAQ is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 8, 2013, 07:15 AM   #25
jonAppleSeed
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Doesn't Apple hold the trademark on iPad?
So trying to trademake iPad Mini would be useless.
iPad being the trademark, mini being the model.

Edit: *damn, someone already pointed that out*
jonAppleSeed is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Samsung Reportedly Becomes Primary iPad Display Supplier as Next-Generation iPad Mini Grows Closer MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 73 Aug 8, 2013 07:16 PM
Key Claim of Apple's 'Rubber Banding' Patent Once Again Found Invalid by U.S. Patent Office MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 130 Apr 10, 2013 09:10 AM
Apple's 'iPad Mini' Trademark Application Initially Denied, but Resolution Should Be Simple MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 83 Apr 8, 2013 09:25 AM
US Patent Office Denies iPad Mini Trademark 725032 Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion 1 Mar 31, 2013 03:00 AM
U.S. Patent Office Preliminarily Invalidates Apple's 'Steve Jobs Patent' on the iPhone MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 295 Jan 30, 2013 07:35 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:39 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC