United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

Office Action (Official Letter) About Applicant’s Trademark Application

 

 

NONFINAL OFFICE ACTION

 

The USPTO must receive applicant’s response to this letter within six months of the issue date below or the application will be abandoned.  Respond using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS).  A link to the appropriate TEAS response form appears at the end of this Office action. 

 

Issue date:  April 05, 2022

 

The referenced application has been reviewed by the assigned trademark examining attorney.  Applicant must respond timely and completely to the issues below.  15 U.S.C. §1062(b); 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(a), 2.65(a); TMEP §§711, 718.03.

 

SUMMARY OF ISSUES:

 

• Section 2(d) Refusal – Likelihood of Confusion
• Identification & Classification of Goods and Services
• Multiple-Class Application Requirements
• Disclaimer Required

 

SECTION 2(d) REFUSAL – LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION

 

Registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the marks in U.S. Registration Nos. 6010744 & 6010745.  Trademark Act Section 2(d), 15 U.S.C. §1052(d); see TMEP §§1207.01 et seq.  See the attached registrations.

 

Applicant has applied to register the mark TRUTH SOCIAL (in standard characters) for “Software and software applications to enable transmission, access, organization, and management of text messaging, instant messaging, online blog journals, text, weblinks, and images via the internet and other communications networks; computer software used to enhance the capabilities and features of other software and non downloadable online software; software for accessing information on a global computer network; downloadable software via the internet and wireless devices for accessing, sending, and receiving information on a global computer network; downloadable software for computers, portable handheld digital electronic communication devices, mobile devices, and wired and wireless communication devices for facilitation of communication and data transmission in the field of social networking; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for use with computers, portable handheld digital electronic communication devices, mobile devices, and wired and wireless communication devices for facilitation of communication; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for social networking; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for real-time delivery of data, messages, location, photographs, links, text and other data related thereto; downloadable software to facilitate online advertising, business promotion, connecting social network users with businesses and for providing strategy, insight, marketing, and predicting consumer behavior” in International Class 42.  The mark in U.S. Registration No. 6010744 is VERO – TRUE SOCIAL (in standard characters) for “Downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for creating, sharing, disseminating and posting photos, videos, personal and general information for the purposes of social, personal and professional networking; Downloadable software, namely, instant messaging software, file sharing software, communications software for electronically exchanging data, audio, video images and graphics via computer, mobile, wireless, telecommunications networks and downloadable computer software for processing images, graphics, audio, video, and text; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for displaying and sharing a user's location and personal preferences and finding, locating, and interacting with other users and places; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for operating online retail store services featuring a wide variety of consumer goods of others, and for operating an online shopping website with links to the retail advertisements and retail sites of others for promoting and showcasing the goods of others” in International Class 9.  The mark in U.S. Registration No. 6010745 is VERO – TRUE SOCIAL (in standard characters) for “Online social networking services” in International Class 42.

 

Trademark Act Section 2(d) bars registration of an applied-for mark that is so similar to a registered mark that it is likely consumers would be confused, mistaken, or deceived as to the commercial source of the goods and services of the parties.  See 15 U.S.C. §1052(d).  Likelihood of confusion is determined on a case-by-case basis by applying the factors set forth in In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357, 1361, 177 USPQ 563, 567 (C.C.P.A. 1973) (called the “du Pont factors”).  In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1322, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1747 (Fed. Cir. 2017).  Any evidence of record related to those factors need be considered; however, “not all of the DuPont factors are relevant or of similar weight in every case.”  In re Guild Mortg. Co., 912 F.3d 1376, 1379, 129 USPQ2d 1160, 1162 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (quoting In re Dixie Rests., Inc., 105 F.3d 1405, 1406, 41 USPQ2d 1531, 1533 (Fed. Cir. 1997)).

 

Although not all du Pont factors may be relevant, there are generally two key considerations in any likelihood of confusion analysis:  (1) the similarities between the compared marks and (2) the relatedness of the compared goods and services.  See In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d at 1322, 123 USPQ2d at 1747 (quoting Herbko Int’l, Inc. v. Kappa Books, Inc., 308 F.3d 1156, 1164-65, 64 USPQ2d 1375, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2002)); Federated Foods, Inc. v. Fort Howard Paper Co., 544 F.2d 1098, 1103, 192 USPQ 24, 29 (C.C.P.A. 1976) (“The fundamental inquiry mandated by [Section] 2(d) goes to the cumulative effect of differences in the essential characteristics of the goods [or services] and differences in the marks.”); TMEP §1207.01. 

 

Similarity 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 Inn at St. John’s, LLC, 126 USPQ2d 1742, 1746 (TTAB 2018) (citing In re Davia, 110 USPQ2d 1810, 1812 (TTAB 2014)), aff’d per curiam, 777 F. App’x 516, 2019 BL 343921 (Fed. Cir. 2019); TMEP §1207.01(b).

 

Applicant has applied to register the mark TRUTH SOCIAL.  The marks in U.S. Registration Nos. 6010744 & 6010745 are both VERO – TRUE SOCIAL.  Each of the marks appear in standard characters.

 

Marks may be confusingly similar in appearance where similar terms or phrases or similar parts of terms or phrases appear in the compared marks and create a similar overall commercial impression.  See Crocker Nat’l Bank v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, 228 USPQ 689, 690-91 (TTAB 1986), aff’d sub nom. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Wells Fargo Bank, Nat’l Ass’n, 811 F.2d 1490, 1495, 1 USPQ2d 1813, 1817 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (finding COMMCASH and COMMUNICASH confusingly similar); In re Corning Glass Works, 229 USPQ 65, 66 (TTAB 1985) (finding CONFIRM and CONFIRMCELLS confusingly similar); In re Pellerin Milnor Corp., 221 USPQ 558, 560 (TTAB 1983) (finding MILTRON and MILLTRONICS confusingly similar); TMEP §1207.01(b)(ii)-(iii).

 

Here, each of the marks share the wording in common “TRUTH SOCIAL” or “TRUE SOCIAL.”  The words appear in the same order, and create the same commercial impression.  The small difference of “TRUTH” and “TRUE” does not obviate the refusal.  Please see the attached Internet dictionary evidence from Lexico.com showing the similar meanings behind both words – “truth” literally means “the quality or state of being true.”

 

In essence, applicant has merely deleted the term “VERO”, which also means “truth”, from the beginning of the registered wording.  Although applicant’s mark does not contain the entirety of the registered mark, applicant’s mark is likely to appear to prospective purchasers as a shortened form of registrant’s mark.  See In re Mighty Leaf Tea, 601 F.3d 1342, 1348, 94 USPQ2d 1257, 1260 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (quoting United States Shoe Corp., 229 USPQ 707, 709 (TTAB 1985)).  Thus, merely omitting some of the wording from a registered mark may not overcome a likelihood of confusion.  See In re Mighty Leaf Tea, 601 F.3d 1342, 94 USPQ2d 1257; In re Optica Int’l, 196 USPQ 775, 778 (TTAB 1977); TMEP §1207.01(b)(ii)-(iii).  In this case, applicant’s mark does not create a distinct commercial impression from the registered mark because it contains some of the wording in the registered mark and does not add any wording that would distinguish it from that mark.

 

Therefore, the marks are identical in part, and highly similar in terms of connotation and overall commercial impression.

 

Similarity of the Goods and Services

 

The goods and services are compared to determine whether they are similar, 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, 1207.01(a)(vi).

 

The compared goods and services 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); TMEP §1207.01(a)(i).  They need only be “related in some manner and/or if the circumstances surrounding their marketing are 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).

 

Applicant has identified “Software and software applications to enable transmission, access, organization, and management of text messaging, instant messaging, online blog journals, text, weblinks, and images via the internet and other communications networks; computer software used to enhance the capabilities and features of other software and non downloadable online software; software for accessing information on a global computer network; downloadable software via the internet and wireless devices for accessing, sending, and receiving information on a global computer network; downloadable software for computers, portable handheld digital electronic communication devices, mobile devices, and wired and wireless communication devices for facilitation of communication and data transmission in the field of social networking; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for use with computers, portable handheld digital electronic communication devices, mobile devices, and wired and wireless communication devices for facilitation of communication; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for social networking; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for real-time delivery of data, messages, location, photographs, links, text and other data related thereto; downloadable software to facilitate online advertising, business promotion, connecting social network users with businesses and for providing strategy, insight, marketing, and predicting consumer behavior” in International Class 42.  The mark in U.S. Registration No. 6010744 is for “Downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for creating, sharing, disseminating and posting photos, videos, personal and general information for the purposes of social, personal and professional networking; Downloadable software, namely, instant messaging software, file sharing software, communications software for electronically exchanging data, audio, video images and graphics via computer, mobile, wireless, telecommunications networks and downloadable computer software for processing images, graphics, audio, video, and text; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for displaying and sharing a user's location and personal preferences and finding, locating, and interacting with other users and places; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for operating online retail store services featuring a wide variety of consumer goods of others, and for operating an online shopping website with links to the retail advertisements and retail sites of others for promoting and showcasing the goods of others” in International Class 9.  The mark in U.S. Registration No. 6010745 is “Online social networking services” in International Class 42.

 

Determining likelihood of confusion is based on the description of the goods and services stated in the application and registration at issue, not on extrinsic evidence of actual use.  See In re Detroit Athletic Co., 903 F.3d 1297, 1307, 128 USPQ2d 1047, 1052 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (citing In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 866 F.3d 1315, 1325, 123 USPQ2d 1744, 1749 (Fed. Cir. 2017)).  

 

In this case, the application uses broad wording to describe software that is used for social networking or communication and accessing or sending information, which presumably encompasses all software of the type described, including the more narrow software goods in U.S. Registration No. 6010744.  See, e.g., In re Solid State Design Inc., 125 USPQ2d 1409, 1412-15 (TTAB 2018); Sw. Mgmt., Inc. v. Ocinomled, Ltd., 115 USPQ2d 1007, 1025 (TTAB 2015).  Thus, applicant’s and registrant’s goods are legally identical.  See, e.g., In re i.am.symbolic, llc, 127 USPQ2d 1627, 1629 (TTAB 2018) (citing Tuxedo Monopoly, Inc. v. Gen. Mills Fun Grp., Inc., 648 F.2d 1335, 1336, 209 USPQ 986, 988 (C.C.P.A. 1981); Inter IKEA Sys. B.V. v. Akea, LLC, 110 USPQ2d 1734, 1745 (TTAB 2014); Baseball Am. Inc. v. Powerplay Sports Ltd., 71 USPQ2d 1844, 1847 n.9 (TTAB 2004)).

 

Further, applicant’s software is specifically for “social networking”, which is the exact service provided in U.S. Registration No. 6010745.  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.  TMEP §1207.01(a)(ii); see In re Detroit Athletic Co., 903 F.3d 1297, 1307, 128 USPQ2d 1047, 1051 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (finding retail shops featuring sports team related clothing and apparel related to various clothing items, including athletic uniforms); In re Hyper Shoppes (Ohio), Inc., 837 F.2d 463, 6 USPQ2d 1025 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (finding retail grocery and general merchandise store services related to furniture); In re United Serv. Distribs., Inc., 229 USPQ 237 (TTAB 1986) (finding distributorship services in the field of health and beauty aids related to skin cream); In re Phillips-Van Heusen Corp., 228 USPQ 949 (TTAB 1986) (finding various items of men’s, boys’, girls’ and women’s clothing related to restaurant services and towels); Steelcase Inc. v. Steelcare Inc., 219 USPQ 433 (TTAB 1983) (finding refinishing of furniture, office furniture, and machinery related to office furniture and accessories); Mack Trucks, Inc. v. Huskie Freightways, Inc., 177 USPQ 32 (TTAB 1972) (finding trucking services related to motor trucks and buses). 

 

The software goods of applicant are directly featuring the services of registrant – thus, the goods and services are related, and consumers will be likely to assume a connection when seeing the similar marks.

 

Additionally, the goods and services of the parties have no restrictions as to nature, type, channels of trade, or classes of purchasers and are “presumed to travel in the same channels of trade to the same class of purchasers.”  In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d 1905, 1908 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (quoting Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Packard Press, Inc., 281 F.3d 1261, 1268, 62 USPQ2d 1001, 1005 (Fed. Cir. 2002)).  Thus, applicant’s and registrant’s goods and services are related.

 

Summary

 

In sum, applicant’s mark is identical in part and highly similar in connotation and overall commercial impression to both of the registered marks.  In addition, applicant’s services are similar to the goods and services identified in the registrations.  Thus, it is likely consumers will mistakenly believe the goods and services emanate from the same source.  The overriding concern is not only to prevent buyer confusion as to the source of the goods and services, but to protect the registrant from adverse commercial impact due to use of a similar mark by a newcomer.  See In re Shell Oil Co., 992 F.2d 1204, 1208, 26 USPQ2d 1687, 1690 (Fed. Cir. 1993).  Therefore, any doubt regarding a likelihood of confusion determination is resolved in favor of the registrant.  TMEP §1207.01(d)(i); see Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Packard Press, Inc., 281 F.3d 1261, 1265, 62 USPQ2d 1001, 1003 (Fed. Cir. 2002); In re Hyper Shoppes (Ohio), Inc., 837 F.2d 463, 464-65, 6 USPQ2d 1025, 1026 (Fed. Cir. 1988).

 

Accordingly, registration is refused pursuant to Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act.

 

Although applicant’s mark has been refused registration, applicant may respond to the refusals by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.

 

If applicant responds to the refusals, applicant must also respond to the requirements set forth below.

 

IDENTIFICATION & CLASSIFICATION OF GOODS AND SERVICES

 

Some of the identifications for software in International Class 9 is indefinite and too broad and must be clarified to specify whether the format is downloadable, recorded, or online non-downloadable.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.32(a)(6); TMEP §§1402.03(d), 1402.11(a).  Downloadable and recorded goods are in International Class 9, whereas providing their temporary, online non-downloadable use is a service in International Class 42.  See TMEP §1402.03(d).

 

In addition, in its application, applicant did not designate the international class numbers for applicant’s goods and services.  Thus, the USPTO conducted a preliminary review and assigned an international class number to them.  See TMEP §1401.03(b).  However, some of the software goods properly belong in International Class 9, not in International Class 42.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(7), 2.85; TMEP §§1401.02(a), 1401.03(b).  Applicant needs to specify and re-classify if necessary.

 

Applicant should note that any wording in bold, in italics, underlined and/or in ALL CAPS below offers guidance and/or shows the changes being proposed for the identification of goods and services.  If there is wording in the applicant’s version of the identification of goods and services which should be removed, it will be shown with a line through it such as this: strikethrough.  When making its amendments, applicant should enter them in standard font, not in bold, in italics, underlined and/or in ALL CAPS.

 

Applicant may adopt the following identification, if accurate:

 

International Class 9:  DOWNLOADABLE SOFTWARE VIA THE INTERNET AND WIRELESS DEVICES FOR ACCESSING, SENDING, AND RECEIVING INFORMATION ON A GLOBAL COMPUTER NETWORK; DOWNLOADABLE SOFTWARE FOR COMPUTERS, PORTABLE HANDHELD DIGITAL ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION DEVICES, MOBILE DEVICES, AND WIRED AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICES FOR FACILITATION OF COMMUNICATION AND DATA TRANSMISSION IN THE FIELD OF SOCIAL NETWORKING; DOWNLOADABLE SOFTWARE IN THE NATURE OF A MOBILE APPLICATION FOR USE WITH COMPUTERS, PORTABLE HANDHELD DIGITAL ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION DEVICES, MOBILE DEVICES, AND WIRED AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICES FOR FACILITATION OF COMMUNICATION; DOWNLOADABLE SOFTWARE IN THE NATURE OF A MOBILE APPLICATION FOR SOCIAL NETWORKING; DOWNLOADABLE SOFTWARE IN THE NATURE OF A MOBILE APPLICATION FOR REAL-TIME DELIVERY OF DATA, MESSAGES, LOCATION, PHOTOGRAPHS, LINKS, TEXT AND OTHER DATA RELATED THERETO; DOWNLOADABLE SOFTWARE TO FACILITATE ONLINE ADVERTISING, BUSINESS PROMOTION, CONNECTING SOCIAL NETWORK USERS WITH BUSINESSES AND FOR PROVIDING STRATEGY, INSIGHT, MARKETING, AND PREDICTING CONSUMER BEHAVIOR

 

International Class 42:  PROVIDING TEMPORARY USE OF ON-LINE, NON-DOWNLOADABLE software and software applications to enable transmission, access, organization, and management of text messaging, instant messaging, online blog journals, text, weblinks, and images via the internet and other communications networks; PROVIDING TEMPORARY USE OF ON-LINE, NON-DOWNLOADABLE computer software used to enhance the capabilities and features of other software and non downloadable online software; PROVIDING TEMPORARY USE OF ON-LINE, NON-DOWNLOADABLE software for accessing information on a global computer network; downloadable software via the internet and wireless devices for accessing, sending, and receiving information on a global computer network; downloadable software for computers, portable handheld digital electronic communication devices, mobile devices, and wired and wireless communication devices for facilitation of communication and data transmission in the field of social networking; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for use with computers, portable handheld digital electronic communication devices, mobile devices, and wired and wireless communication devices for facilitation of communication; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for social networking; downloadable software in the nature of a mobile application for real-time delivery of data, messages, location, photographs, links, text and other data related thereto; downloadable software to facilitate online advertising, business promotion, connecting social network users with businesses and for providing strategy, insight, marketing, and predicting consumer behavior

 

Applicant’s goods and services may be clarified or limited, but may not be expanded beyond those originally itemized in the application or as acceptably amended.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.71(a); TMEP §1402.06.  Applicant may clarify or limit the identification by inserting qualifying language or deleting items to result in a more specific identification; however, applicant may not substitute different goods and services or add goods and services not found or encompassed by those in the original application or as acceptably amended.  See TMEP §1402.06(a)-(b).  The scope of the goods and services sets the outer limit for any changes to the identification and is generally determined by the ordinary meaning of the wording in the identification.  TMEP §§1402.06(b), 1402.07(a)-(b).  Any acceptable changes to the goods and services will further limit scope, and once goods and services are deleted, they are not permitted to be reinserted.  TMEP §1402.07(e).

 

For assistance with identifying and classifying goods and services in trademark applications, please see the USPTO’s online searchable U.S. Acceptable Identification of Goods and Services Manual.  See TMEP §1402.04.

 

MULTIPLE-CLASS APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS

 

The application identifies goods and services in more than one international class; therefore, applicant must satisfy all the requirements below for each international class based on Trademark Act Section 1(b):

 

(1)        List the goods and/or services by their international class number in consecutive numerical order, starting with the lowest numbered class.

 

(2)        Submit a filing fee for each international class not covered by the fee already paid (view the USPTO’s current fee schedule).  The application identifies goods and services that are classified in at least 2 classes; however, applicant submitted a fee sufficient for only 1 class.  Applicant must either submit the filing fees for the classes not covered by the submitted fees or restrict the application to the number of classes covered by the fees already paid.

 

See 37 C.F.R. §2.86(a); TMEP §§1403.01, 1403.02(c).

 

For an overview of the requirements for a Section 1(b) multiple-class application and how to satisfy the requirements online using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) form, see the Multiple-class Application webpage.

 

DISCLAIMER REQUIRED

 

Applicant must disclaim the wording “SOCIAL” because it is merely descriptive of an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose, or use of applicant’s goods and services.  See 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd., 695 F.3d 1247, 1251, 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1755 (Fed. Cir. 2012); TMEP §§1213, 1213.03(a). 

 

This term directly appears in applicant’s identification of goods and services.  Thus, the wording merely describes a feature of applicant’s goods and services because the software is meant to be used for social networking purposes.

 

Applicant may respond to this issue by submitting a disclaimer in the following format: 

 

No claim is made to the exclusive right to use “SOCIAL” apart from the mark as shown. 

 

For an overview of disclaimers and instructions on how to provide one using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), see the Disclaimer webpage. 

 

RESPONSE GUIDELINES

 

For this application to proceed, applicant must explicitly address each refusal and requirement in this Office action.  For a refusal, applicant may provide written arguments and evidence against the refusal, and may have other response options if specified above.  For a requirement, applicant should set forth the changes or statements.  Please see “Responding to Office Actions” and the informational video “Response to Office Action” for more information and tips on responding.

 

Please call or email the assigned trademark examining attorney with questions about this Office action.  Although an examining attorney cannot provide legal advice, the examining attorney can provide additional explanation about the refusals and requirements in this Office action.  See TMEP §§705.02, 709.06. 

 

The USPTO does not accept emails as responses to Office actions; however, emails can be used for informal communications and are included in the application record.  See 37 C.F.R. §§2.62(c), 2.191; TMEP §§304.01-.02, 709.04-.05. 

 

How to respond.  Click to file a response to this nonfinal Office action.    

 

Cameron McBride

/Cameron McBride/

Examining Attorney - Trademarks

Law Office 106

(571) 272-0542

Cameron.McBride@uspto.gov

 

RESPONSE GUIDANCE

• Missing the response deadline to this letter will cause the application to abandon.  A response or notice of appeal must be received by the USPTO before midnight Eastern Time of the last day of the response period.  TEAS and ESTTA maintenance or unforeseen circumstances could affect an applicant’s ability to timely respond.  

 

• Responses signed by an unauthorized party are not accepted and can cause the application to abandon.  If applicant does not have an attorney, the response must be signed by the individual applicant, all joint applicants, or someone with legal authority to bind a juristic applicant.  If applicant has an attorney, the response must be signed by the attorney.

 

• If needed, find contact information for the supervisor of the office or unit listed in the signature block.