[E-trademarks] Refusal because examiner claims that actual street address is really virtual

[Jessica R. Friedman]

An application is being refused because the examining attorney maintains, on the basis of I know not what, that Applicant’s provided address appears to be that of a virtual office claimed by various businesses, and therefore is not the location of applicant’s headquarters where its senior executives or officers ordinarily direct and control applicant’s activities.

The address, which includes street number and suite number, is that of my client’s law firm, from which she also runs the applicant company. This same address has been the basis for other trademark applications without any such objection.

Of all the objections I’ve received in my more than 40 years of doing this work, this has to be the most asinine. Since when does/can an EA claim that an actual street address isn’t an actual street address? Does someone actually have to go and take a photo of the building to prove that it’s a real address?


Jessica R. Friedman
Attorney at Law
300 East 59 Street, Ste. 2406
New York, NY 10022
Phone: 212-220-0900
Cell: 917-647-1884
E-mail: jrfriedman at litproplaw.com<mailto:jrfriedman at litproplaw.com>
URL: www.literarypropertylaw.com<http://www.literarypropertylaw.com>

[1479430908386_PastedImage]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250912/e0f2f8ab/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001[53].png
Type: image/png
Size: 8892 bytes
Desc: image001[53].png
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250912/e0f2f8ab/attachment.png>