What your office action actually says
The USPTO examining attorney has refused registration on two grounds. First, they believe QUERYFAST is merely descriptive—that it immediately tells consumers the product makes queries fast, rather than requiring imagination to understand its meaning. Second, they are requiring a disclaimer of the word FAST, meaning you would not claim exclusive rights to that common word standing alone. Both refusals are routine in software trademark practice, and both are the kind an applicant is permitted to answer directly. This pack drafts those answers from the facts you supply and states plainly where each one is weak.
1. QUERYFAST Is Suggestive, Not Merely Descriptive
15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1) · TMEP §1209.01(b)
I respectfully submit that QUERYFAST is suggestive rather than merely descriptive of my database query optimization software. A mark is merely descriptive only if it immediately conveys a quality, feature, or characteristic of the goods without requiring thought or imagination. A suggestive mark, by contrast, requires a mental leap to connect the term to the product.
QUERYFAST requires that imaginative step. The compound term does not appear in standard dictionaries. It does not immediately describe how the service works—consumers must understand that 'query' refers to database commands and that 'fast' means the service optimizes performance, then synthesize those concepts into a single impression of the product. That multi-step reasoning is the hallmark of a suggestive mark.
Competitors in my field do not use the term QUERYFAST to describe their services. Industry participants describe the category as 'query acceleration' and 'database performance,' not as 'queryfast' services. This competitive usage confirms that QUERYFAST is not the natural, ordinary way of describing these goods.
Since September 2021, I have operated this service under the QUERYFAST mark continuously. The service now has 1,400 paying accounts at price points ranging from $99 to $900 per month, sold directly and through developer word of mouth to engineering leads at mid-size software companies. The mark has received unsolicited press coverage. While commercial success alone does not prove suggestiveness, sustained use in commerce under a single mark does show that the term functions as a source identifier rather than a generic product description.
For these reasons, QUERYFAST is suggestive and registrable on the Principal Register without a claim of acquired distinctiveness.
Where this argument is weak
This argument is moderately strong but not certain. The examining attorney may reasonably believe that software buyers immediately understand QUERYFAST to mean 'a service that makes queries fast' without requiring imagination. The fact that you have press coverage and five years of use strongly supports a fallback argument under 15 U.S.C. §2(f) that the mark has acquired distinctiveness, but you did not check that box on your application. If the examiner maintains the refusal, you would then need to either amend to the Supplemental Register (which provides fewer rights) or file a new §2(f) claim with specimens spanning five years, which would extend prosecution. Attach all press coverage, customer testimonials using QUERYFAST as a brand name, and any evidence showing that consumers recognize QUERYFAST as your mark rather than as a description.
Facts this argument relies on — check every one against your records
- Hosted service that rewrites and caches SQL queries
- $99-$900/month price point
- Direct sales and developer word of mouth channels
- Engineering leads at mid-size software companies as buyers
- Use since 2021-09
- 1,400 paying accounts
- Unsolicited press coverage
- Competitors describe the category as 'query acceleration' and 'database performance'
Evidence to attach
- Screenshots or PDFs of unsolicited press coverage mentioning QUERYFAST
- Examples of competitor websites showing use of 'query acceleration' and 'database performance' but not 'queryfast'
- Customer testimonials or social media posts referring to QUERYFAST as a brand
- Marketing materials showing QUERYFAST used as a source identifier
2. Disclaimer of FAST
15 U.S.C. §1056(a) · TMEP §1213
I agree to disclaim the word FAST apart from the mark as shown. The disclaimer will read: 'No claim is made to the exclusive right to use FAST apart from the mark as shown.'
I understand that this disclaimer does not affect my rights in the composite mark QUERYFAST as a whole. It simply acknowledges that the word FAST, standing alone, is not something I can prevent others from using in their own marks or advertising. The distinctive element of my mark is the combination and the overall commercial impression, not the individual word FAST.
This disclaimer resolves the examining attorney's concern under 15 U.S.C. §1056(a) and TMEP §1213.
Where this argument is weak
This is not a weak argument—it is a straightforward concession that resolves the disclaimer refusal immediately. The only risk is that agreeing to disclaim FAST may be read by the examining attorney as implicit acknowledgment that QUERYFAST as a whole is descriptive, which could embolden them to maintain the §2(e)(1) refusal. However, the two issues are legally distinct: a mark can contain an unregistrable component and still be registrable as a whole. Disclaiming is routine and usually the correct strategic move.
Filing it yourself, step by step
- Log in to the Trademark Status & Document Retrieval (TSDR) system at https://tsdr.uspto.gov/ and locate your serial number.
- Click 'File a document' or go directly to the TEAS Response to Office Action form at https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/apply/response-office-action.
- Enter your serial number when prompted.
- In the 'Response to Office Action' section, check the box for 'Arguments/Evidence in Support of Registration.'
- Paste or type the QUERYFAST Is Suggestive argument under the §2(e)(1) refusal heading.
- Paste or type the Disclaimer of FAST argument under the disclaimer refusal heading.
- In the 'Disclaimer' field, enter exactly: 'No claim is made to the exclusive right to use FAST apart from the mark as shown.'
- Under 'Attachment of Evidence,' upload each piece of evidence (press coverage, competitor website examples, testimonials) as a separate PDF. Label each file clearly, e.g., 'Exhibit A - Press Coverage.pdf'.
- In the signature section, type your full legal name, your title (e.g., 'Owner' or 'Managing Member'), and today's date. By typing your name you are signing under penalty of perjury that the statements are true.
- Review the entire form. You are responsible for everything it says.
- Click 'Validate' to check for errors, then 'Pay/Submit.' The filing fee for a response to an office action is $0 if filed on time.
- Save the confirmation email and the date-stamped PDF the USPTO sends you.
When to stop and hire a trademark attorney instead
You should hire a trademark attorney now or before filing if: (1) you are uncomfortable signing a document making legal arguments under penalty of perjury, (2) the examining attorney issues a final refusal after this response and you want to appeal or request reconsideration, (3) you decide to pursue a claim of acquired distinctiveness under §2(f), which requires careful specimen selection and argument, or (4) you receive a second office action raising new issues such as likelihood of confusion with another mark. This response addresses the current refusals clearly, but trademark prosecution can become complex quickly, and an attorney can handle procedure you may find opaque.