According to the new filing, attempts to trademark the term “Robotaxi” regarding vehicles have been rejected by US patents and trademark offices. Another application by Tesla trademarks the term “Robotaxi” for future ride services.
Furthermore, applications from Tesla for the trademark for the term “CyberCab” have been suspended due to other companies pursuing similar “Cyber” trademarks. This includes one company that has applied for numerous trademarks related to aftermarket cybertruck accessories.
USPTO issued what is called “Non-Final Office Action” on Tuesday in the “Robotaxi” trademark application. So Tesla has a three-month answer. The trademark attorney representing Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Tesla applied for its trademark in October 2024 on the same day it unveiled Cybercab, a dedicated electric vehicle that it hopes to use one day in its planned autonomous cab services. Tesla submitted two similar trademark applications for the term “Robobus” on October 10th, which is still under review.
The rejected trademark was assigned to the USPTO Examiner on April 14th. Tesla said it uses words related to “.”[l]and vehicles; electric vehicles; i.e. automobiles; automobiles; according to the original application, the structural parts for that.
The USPTO examiner discovered that there were no conflicting trademarks present, but rejected the application as it was “merely descriptive.” The examiner wrote that the term “Robotaxi” is “used to describe similar products or services by other companies.”
“[S]The examiner writes that UCH’s language appears to be common in the context of the applicant’s products and services.
TechCrunch Events
Berkeley, California
|
June 5th
Book now
Tesla is permitted to submit evidence and arguments in favor of the trademark and in favour of that argument. If so, USPTO told Tesla:[f]ACT sheets, instruction manuals, brochures, advertisements and appropriate screenshots of the applicant’s website are related to the product and/or service of the application, including materials using the terminology of the application. ”
In other words, Tesla needs to provide the agency with a concrete plan as to how and why it is worthy of the “Robotaxi” trademark.
The examiner also wrote that if the term “competitor” is used, “advertising similar goods or services to promote a robot, robot, or robot,” you should communicate Tesla to the USPTO.
Other applications of Tesla’s “Robotaxi” trademark cover the use of words when providing transportation services, such as “coordinating travel arrangements for individuals and groups,” “arrange time-based ride-sharing services,” and offering vehicle sharing or rentals. The application was also assigned to the USPTO examiner on April 14th, but no decision was filed.
This story has been updated to include information about the “Cybercab” trademark application.
Source link
