Navigation



1300 search results for query trademark trial and appeal board


All

KAIROS INST. OF SOUND HEALING v. DOOLITTLE GARD, 91181945 (TTAB 10-17-2008) , 91181945 (2008)

Doolittle Gardens, LLC Opposition No. 91181945United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: October 17, 2008Page 1 See Notice of Final Rulemaking, MiscellaneousChanges to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules, 72 Fed. Trial and Appeal Board relating to disclosure"Page 7 within the contemplation of Trademark Rule 2.120(g)(1).

IN RE NATUROPATHIC NATIONAL COUNCIL, INC., 76642489 (TTAB 5-5-2008) , 76642489 (2008)

Serial No. 76642489United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: May 5, 2008Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure (TBMP) § 502.03 (2d ed. rev. 2004). Further, Trademark Rule 2.142(d) provides that the record in an application should be complete prior to the filing of an appeal, and additional evidence

IN RE TRUMPF GMBH CO. KG, 79015006 (TTAB 7-25-2005) , 79015006 (2005)

KG Serial No. 79015006United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Filed: July 25, 2005Mailed: November 30, 2007Page 1 Costas Pepe Hazard LLP 225 Asylum Street Hartford, CT 06103-1516 On April 10, 2007, applicant filed a notice of appeal, and the Board instituted the By the Trademark Trial and Appeal BoardPage 2 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE IS BLANK.]

IN RE TRUMPF GMBH CO. KG, 79015005 (TTAB 7-25-2005) , 79015005 (2005)

KG Serial No. 79015005United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Filed: July 25, 2005Mailed: November 29, 2007Page 1 Costas Pepe Hazard LLP 225 Asylum Street Hartford, CT 06103-1516 On April 10, 2007, applicant filed a notice of appeal, and the Board instituted the By the Trademark Trial and Appeal BoardPage 2 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE IS BLANK.]

BOSTON v. HARRY F. CHAVERIAT III, 91182083 (TTAB 6-23-2008) , 91182083 (2008)

ChaveriatIII Opposition No. 91182083United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: June 23, 2008Page 1 THIS OPINION Trademark Rules 2.120(a)(2) and 2.120(a)(3), as amended, allow parties to modify the discovery and trial schedule, including the deadline for making initial Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules (Final Rule), 72 Fed. Reg. 42242, 42245 (August 1, 2007).

MOTION PICTURE ASSC. v. RESPECT SPORT., 91153141 (TTAB 10-2-2007) , 91153141 (2007)

Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: October 2, 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT OF THE T.T.A.B. Before Hohein, Bucher and Cataldo, Administrative Trademark Judges. The times specified may be extended by order of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board on motion for good cause.

PROMGIRL, INC. v. JPC CO., 91190017 (TTAB 12-24-2009) , 91190017 (2009)

Opposition No. 91190017United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: December 24, 2009Page 1 THIS DECISION IS A , or if a party fails to comply with an order of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board relating to disclosure or discovery, including a protective order See Notice of FinalRulemaking, Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial and Appeal BoardRules, 72 Fed.

ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR CO. v. ADVANTAGE RENT-A-CAR, 120,101 (TTAB 3-26-2002) , 120,101 (2002)

Opposition No. 120,101United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board March 26, 2002Mailed: April 9, 2002Page 1 THIS DISPOSITION It seems hardly necessary to note that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board is an administrative tribunal, established by statute for narrow and specific dilution under Trademark Act § 43(c),[fn9] a holding which was affirmed on appeal.

IN RE WILLIAM B. SIEGEL, 75/539,620 (TTAB 10-11-2001) , 75/539,620 (2001)

Siegel Serial No. 75/539,620United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board October 11, 2001Page 1 THIS DISPOSITION IS NOT With respect to the request for remand, applicant is advised that an application which has been considered and decided on appeal will not be reopened except Because the Board issued a final decision on appeal on July 20, 2001, the Board has no authority to reopen the application to await the disposition of

THE EQUINE TOUCH FOUNDATION, INC. v. EQUINOLOGY, 92050044 (TTAB 2-10-2009) , 92050044 (2009)

Cancellation No. 92050044United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: February 10, 2009Page 1 THIS OPINION IS the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's Manual of Procedure ("TBMP") "as excusing the petitioner from making service" and that "the TTAB will make service By this notice, various rules governing Trademark Trial and Appeal Board inter partes proceedings were amended.

PEPSICO, INC. v. SIMEX, 93,359 (TTAB 11-29-2000) , 93,359 (2000)

Simex, Aussenhandelsgesellschaf tSavelsberg KG Opposition No. 93,359[fn1]United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board November Rogers Administrative Trademark Judges, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board [fn2] These papers comprise opposers' April 28, 1997 motion to file a sur-reply [fn5] The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure (TBMP) is available in printed form from the Superintendent of Documents, in CD-ROM form

CHOCOLADEFABRIKEN LINDT SPRUNGLI v. FLORES, 91187963 (TTAB 7-30-2009) , 91187963 (2009)

Karlo Flores Opposition No. 91187963United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: July 30, 2009Page 1 THIS OPINION Before Hairston, Kuhlke and Ritchie, Administrative Trademark Judges By the Board: Chocoladefabriken Lindt Sprungli AG ("opposer") has filed an opposition Trial and Appeal Board and must serve a copy of the opposition, including any exhibits, on the attorney of record for the applicant or, if there is no

CARL KARCHER ENTERPRISES v. CARL'S BAR DELI., 91188150 (TTAB 3-31-2011) , 91188150 (2011)

Opposition No. 91188150United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: March 31, 2011Page 1 THIS OPINION IS A PRECEDENT [fn4]See Miscellaneous ChangesPage 8to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules,72 Fed. Reg. 42242, 42242 (August 1, 2007). Trademark Rule 2.121(e). See also Miscellaneous Changes toTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules,72 Fed. Reg. 42242, 42246 (August 1, 2007).

IN RE MED-SURGE HOLDINGS, INC., 76635896 (TTAB 10-31-2007) , 76635896 (2007)

Serial No. 76635896United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: October 31, 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT Before Hairston, Bucher and Drost, Administrative Trademark Judges. [fn1] This case is now before the Board on appeal from the final refusal of the Trademark Examining Attorney to register this designation based upon Section

IN RE BAE SYSTEMS, 76512472 (TTAB 5-11-2007) , 76512472 (2007)

Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: May 11, 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT OF THE T.T.A.B. Tracy Cross, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 109 (Dan Vavonese, Managing Attorney) Before Walters, Holtzman, and Bergsman, Administrative Trademark The Trademark office has consistently refused to allow an applicant to amend its application to the Supplemental Register after anPage 3 appeal has been

IN RE RF MONOLITHICS, 78526998 (TTAB 8-28-2007) , 78526998 (2007)

Serial No. 78526998United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: August 28, 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT Before Hohein, Holtzman and Drost, Administrative Trademark Judges. Applicant's arguments, in essence, constitute nothing more than a rehash of those previously made in its appeal and reply briefs, and none is persuasive

IN RE VICKI ROBERTS, 76649075 (TTAB 5-2-2008) , 76649075 (2008)

IN RE VICKI ROBERTS, 76649075 (TTAB 5-2-2008) In re Vicki Roberts Serial No. 76649075United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal In addition, applicant filed with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board a notice of appeal of the examining attorney's refusal to register. In view of the examining attorney's second refusal to register the subject designation under Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, 3 and 45, the instant appeal

COOPER TECHNOLOGIES CO. v. DENIER ELECTRIC CO., 92048042 (TTAB 12-17-2008) , 92048042 (2008)

Cancellation No. 92048042United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: December 17, 2008Page 1 THIS OPINION IS By this notice, various rules governing Trademark Trial and Appeal Board inter partes proceedings are amended. See Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial and Appeal BoardRules, 72 F.R. 42242, 42256 (August 1, 2007) (comments on briefing of motions).

CORPORACION HABANOS v. RODRIGUEZ, 92052146 (TTAB 8-1-2011) , 92052146 (2011)

Rodriguez Cancellation No. 92052146United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: August 1, 2011Page 1 THIS OPINION prosecute a cancellation petition in the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the United States Patent and Trademark Office to an application to register and Appeal Board of the United States Patent and Trademark Office to the registration "PINAR DEL RIO" for cigars filed by or registered to Juan E.

CSC HOLDINGS, LLC v. SAS OPTIMHOME, 91199973 (TTAB 8-12-2011) , 91199973 (2011)

SAS Optimhome Opposition No. 91199973United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: August 12, 2011Page 1 This Decision Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure ("TBMP") § 110.09(c)(1) (3d ed. 2011) (punctuation revised). [fn2] "ESTTA" is the Electronic System for Trademark Trials and Appeals, a web-based application for filing papers electronically with the Board, and available

IN RE ROBERT M. PIRNIE, 76555048 (TTAB 6-4-2007) , 76555048 (2007)

Pirnie Serial No. 76555048United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: June 4, 2007 On Request Before Quinn, Grendel and Zervas, Administrative Trademark Judges. which the Board found unpersuasive and still finds unpersuasive.

GENERAL COUNCIL v. HERITAGE MUSIC FD., 92051525 (TTAB 2-3-2011) , 92051525 (2011)

HERITAGE MUSIC FOUNDATION Cancellation No. 92051525United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: February 3, 2011Page to Trademark Trial and Appeal BoardRules, 72 Fed. MiscellaneousChanges to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules,72 Fed. Reg. 42242 (August 1, 2007).

GALAXY METAL GEAR v. DIRECT ACCESS TECHNOLOGY, 91184213 (TTAB 8-24-2009) , 91184213 (2009)

Opposition No. 91184213United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: August 24, 2009Page 1 THIS OPINION IS A PRECEDENT OF THE T.T.A.B Cheryl Butler, Attorney, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board: In accordance with the Board's order dated May 15, 2009, opposer's first testimony Trademark Rule 2.l25.Page 11 Briefs shall be filed in accordance with Trademark Rules 2.l28(a) and (b).

RICHARD POINDEXTER v. VINCENT, 92046121 (TTAB 7-11-2008) , 92046121 (2008)

Ballard Cancellation No. 92046121 to Registration No. 3124162 issuedon August 1, 2006United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Further, even if we consider respondent to have implicitly consented to the trial of the asserted claims before the Board in view of his answer, filings [fn3] Petitioner also filed documents by notice of reliance prior to his trial period and, pursuant to the Board order of May 22, 2007, this filing has

VIBE RECORDS, INC. v. VIBE MEDIA GROUP LLC, 91176345 (TTAB 7-11-2008) , 91176345 (2008)

Vibe Media Group LLC Opposition No. 91176345United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: July 11, 2008Page 1 THIS Before Holtzman, Cataldo and Ritchie de Larena, Administrative Trademark Judges. : Correspondence to be filed with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, except notices of ex parte appeal").Page 7 Moreover, it was not appropriate under

IN RE DTI PARTNERSHIP, L.L.P., 76/197,868 (TTAB 4-10-2003) , 76/197,868 (2003)

Serial No. 76/197,868United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Malied: April 10, 2003Page 1 THIS DISPOSITION IS CITABLE The Board instituted and suspended the appeal, and remanded the application to the Trademark Examining Attorney for examination of the request for reconsideration Page 6 The Board then resumed the appeal, and applicant filed an appeal brief which essentially is a verbatim reiteration of its request for reconsideration

IN RE MASCO CORP., OF INDIANA, 77331673 (TTAB 5-24-2011) , 77331673 (2011)

., OF INDIANA, 77331673 (TTAB 5-24-2011) In re Masco Corporation of Indiana Serial No. 77331673United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: May 24, 2011Page 1 [EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] See Trademark Rule 2.142(g); Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure (TBMP) § 1218 (3d ed. rev. 2011).

IN RE HUDSON FAIRFAX GROUP, 76662560 (TTAB 11-21-2008) , 76662560 (2008)

Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: November 21, 2008Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT OF THE T.T.A.B. first time in her appeal brief took the position that INDIA was capable of functioning as a trademark. Specifically, the Board found that RING was a generic term, and that "[o]rdinarily, even if it is used with a trademark, thePage 6 generic name of a product

SCHERING-PLOUGH ANIMAL HEALTH CO. v. AQUA GEN AS, 91176641 (TTAB 3-17-2009) , 91176641 (2009)

Aqua Gen As Opposition No. 91176641United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: March 17, 2009Page 1 THIS OPINION Trademark Rule 2.l25. Briefs shall be filed in accordance with Trademark Rule 2.128(a) and (b). By this notice, various rules governing Trademark Trial and Appeal Board inter partes proceedings are amended.

BAKERY v. BENEDICT, 92047859 (TTAB 9-16-2010) , 92047859 (2010)

Benedict Cancellation No. 92047859United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: September 16, 2010Page 1 THIS OPINION See Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure ("TBMP") Section 527.01(a) (2d ed. rev. 2004). Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules (Final Rule), 63 Fed. Reg. 48,081, 48,094 (Sept. 9, 1998).

IN RE BARRIE HOUSE COFFEE CO., 76592697 (TTAB 8-7-2007) , 76592697 (2007)

Serial No. 76592697United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: August 7, 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board will ordinarily not consider additional evidence filed with the Board by the appellant or by the examiner after the Opinion evidence as to the similarity of the marks is not binding on the Board because the Board must independently evaluate the facts in a case and arrive

IN RE R B RECEIVABLES MGMT., INC., 77855168 (TTAB 9-23-2011) , 77855168 (2011)

Serial No. 77855168United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: September 23, 2011Page 1 [EDITOR'S NOTE: This case Before Walters, Kuhlke and Shaw, Administrative Trademark Judges. made for the first time in its appeal brief to amend application to seek registration on an intent-to-use basis); Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual

HIGHBEAM MARKETING v. HIGHBEAM RESEARCH, 91162372 (TTAB 1-23-2008) , 91162372 (2008)

Highbeam Research, LLC Opposition No. 91162372United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: January 23, 2008Page 1 See "Effect of December 1, 1993 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Inter Partes Proceedings," 1159 to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules," 72 Fed.

IN RE GENITOPE CORPORATION, 76470648 (TTAB 3-31-2006) , 76470648 (2006)

Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: March 31, 2006Page 1 THIS OPINION IS CITABLE AS PRECEDENT OF THE T.T.A.B. In the appeal brief the current Examining Attorney cited Section 1(a)(1)(C) of the Trademark Act as well as Trademark Rule 2.56 for this refusal. Trademark Rule 2.142(d) provides that the record in an appeal should be complete as of the filing of the appeal.

JULES JURGENSEN/RHAPSODY v. PETER BAUMBERGER, 92048667 (TTAB 7-6-2009) , 92048667 (2009)

Peter Baumberger Cancellation No. 92048667United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: July 6, 2009Page 1 THIS [fn3] SeeNotice of Final Rulemaking, Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial andAppeal Board Rules, 72 Fed. Reg. 42242 (Aug. 1, 2007). Trademark Rule 2.125. Briefs shall be filed in accordance with Trademark Rule 2.128(a) and (b).

YAHOO! INC. v. LOUFRANI, 91157129 (TTAB 5-13-2004) , 91157129 (2004)

Franklin Loufrani Opposition No. 91157129United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: May 13, 2004Page 1 THIS In attempting to make its case, opposer relies on Chapter 200 of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's Manual of Procedure (TBMP) and In reElser S.p.A the Board.

IN RE THINK, LLC, 77774652 (TTAB 9-23-2011) , 77774652 (2011)

IN RE THINK, LLC, 77774652 (TTAB 9-23-2011) In re Think, LLC Serial No. 77774652United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Before Bucher, Mermelstein and Shaw, Administrative Trademark Judges. , 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(1).Page 2 After the Trademark Examining Attorney made the refusal final, applicant appealed to this Board.

LIFE ZONE INC. v. MIDDLEMAN GROUP, 91160999 (TTAB 7-15-2008) , 91160999 (2008)

[fn1] Opposition No. 91160999 to Application No. 78307830 filed onOctober 1, 2003United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board See TRADEMARK BOARD MANUAL OF PROCEDURE ("TBMP") § 704.05(b) (2d ed. rev. 2004) (and cases cited therein). [fn6] The Trademark Rules were recently amended. See Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules, 72 Fed.

PRAKASH MELWANI v. ALLEGIANCE CORP., 91190682 (TTAB 12-29-2010) , 91190682 (2010)

Allegiance Corporation Opposition No. 91190682United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: December 29, 2010Page 1 [fn16] Both parties bear the responsibility for following the trial schedule as ordered unless and until the Board issues a suspension order or otherwise [fn13] TTABVUE refers to the "Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Inquiry System," which is the electronic record of proceedings before the Board.

IN RE JOSEPH S. PONGRATZ, 76697006 (TTAB 6-24-2011) , 76697006 (2011)

Pongratz Serial No. 76697006United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: June 24, 2011Page 1 [EDITOR'S NOTE: This Before Bucher, Zervas and Bergsman, Administrative Trademark Judges. Opinion by Bucher, Administrative Trademark Judge: Joseph S. After the Trademark Examining Attorney made the refusal final, applicant appealed to this Board.

NFL PROPERTIES LLC v. DNH MANAGEMENT, 91176569 (TTAB 1-29-2008) , 91176569 (2008)

See Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b) and Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure ("TBMP") § 509 (2d ed. rev. 2004) and cases cited therein. By this notice, various rules governing Trademark Trial and Appeal Board inter partes proceedings are amended. See Trademark Rule 2.120(a); "Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules," 72 F.R. 42242 (August 1, 2007).

O.C. SEACRETS v. HOTELPLAN ITALIA, 91190886 (TTAB 6-7-2010) , 91190886 (2010)

Opposition No. 91190886United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: June 7, 2010Page 1 THIS DECISION IS A PRECEDENT Patent and Trademark Office. Trademark Rule 2.l25. Briefs shall be filed in accordance with Trademark Rules 2.128(a) and (b).

IN RE SHARECARE, INC., 77666496 (TTAB 2-9-2009) , 77666496 (2009)

Serial No. 77666496United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Filed: February 9, 2009Mailed: June 7, 2010Page 1 EDWARD In view thereof, the Board's May 20, 2010 order is herby vacated to the extent that action on the appeal is suspended and the file is remanded to the Trademark In the event the refusal of registration is maintained, the Board shall be so informed, proceedings will be resumed and applicant will be allowed time

L. J.G. v. COSSER, 92040202 (TTAB 2007) , 92040202 (2007)

Cosser Cancellation No. 92040202United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: 14 November 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION Before Bucher, Drost and Cataldo, Administrative Trademark Judges. Opinion by Drost, Administrative Trademark Judge: On January 11, 2007, the board granted petitioner's (L. J.G.

DBC, LLC v. RENAISSANCE HERBS, INC., 91161992 (TTAB 12-7-2007) , 91161992 (2007)

Opposition No. 91161992 to application Serial No. 78262554 onreconsiderationUnited States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed Before Walters, Bucher and Cataldo, Administrative Trademark Judges. Opinion by Cataldo, Administrative Trademark Judge: On October 22, 2007, the Board issued a final decision in the above-captioned proceeding.

SMART INVENTIONS v. TMB PRODUCTS, 92043691 (TTAB 11-1-2006) , 92043691 (2006)

[fn1] Cancellation No. 92043691United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: November 1, 2006 [fn1] Assignment recorded Proceedings are resumed and discovery and trial dates are reset as indicated below. Trademark Rule 2.125. Briefs shall be filed in accordance with Trademark Rules 2.128(a) and (b).

SPRINGFIELD, INC. v. XD, 91180596 (TTAB 2-7-2008) , 91180596 (2008)

XD Opposition No. 91180596United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: February 7, 2008Page 1 THIS DISPOSITION Before Sams, Chief Administrative Trademark Judge, and Rogers and Mermelstein, Administrative Trademark Judges. [fn2] Trademark Rules 2.111(a) and 2.111(c)(4) contain parallel provisions relating to petitions to cancel.

SCHOTT AG v. SCOTT, 91184239 (TTAB 11-13-2008) , 91184239 (2008)

L'Wren Scott Opposition No. 91184239Opposition No. 91184245United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: November 13 Before Seeherman, Rogers and Taylor, Administrative Trademark Judges. By this notice, various rules governing Trademark Trial and Appeal Board inter partes proceedings were amended.

IN RE WIELAND DENTAL + TECHNIK GMBH CO., 76514103 (TTAB 12-28-2007) , 76514103 (2007)

Serial No. 76514103United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: December 28, 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A Before Hohein, Walters and Walsh, Administrative Trademark Judges. and the prevailing authorities, the Board erred in reaching the decision it issued.

IN RE RENEWABLE LUBRICANTS, INC., 77479764 (TTAB 2-9-2011) , 77479764 (2011)

Serial No. 77479764United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: February 9, 2011Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board will ordinarily not consider additional evidence filed with the Board by the appellant or by the examiner after the The Board may consider evidence submitted after appeal despite its untimeliness, if the non-offering party (1) does not object to the evidence and (2)

Opinion

KAIROS INST. OF SOUND HEALING v. DOOLITTLE GARD, 91181945 (TTAB 10-17-2008) , 91181945 (2008)

Doolittle Gardens, LLC Opposition No. 91181945United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: October 17, 2008Page 1 See Notice of Final Rulemaking, MiscellaneousChanges to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules, 72 Fed. Trial and Appeal Board relating to disclosure"Page 7 within the contemplation of Trademark Rule 2.120(g)(1).

IN RE NATUROPATHIC NATIONAL COUNCIL, INC., 76642489 (TTAB 5-5-2008) , 76642489 (2008)

Serial No. 76642489United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: May 5, 2008Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure (TBMP) § 502.03 (2d ed. rev. 2004). Further, Trademark Rule 2.142(d) provides that the record in an application should be complete prior to the filing of an appeal, and additional evidence

IN RE TRUMPF GMBH CO. KG, 79015006 (TTAB 7-25-2005) , 79015006 (2005)

KG Serial No. 79015006United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Filed: July 25, 2005Mailed: November 30, 2007Page 1 Costas Pepe Hazard LLP 225 Asylum Street Hartford, CT 06103-1516 On April 10, 2007, applicant filed a notice of appeal, and the Board instituted the By the Trademark Trial and Appeal BoardPage 2 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE IS BLANK.]

IN RE TRUMPF GMBH CO. KG, 79015005 (TTAB 7-25-2005) , 79015005 (2005)

KG Serial No. 79015005United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Filed: July 25, 2005Mailed: November 29, 2007Page 1 Costas Pepe Hazard LLP 225 Asylum Street Hartford, CT 06103-1516 On April 10, 2007, applicant filed a notice of appeal, and the Board instituted the By the Trademark Trial and Appeal BoardPage 2 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE IS BLANK.]

BOSTON v. HARRY F. CHAVERIAT III, 91182083 (TTAB 6-23-2008) , 91182083 (2008)

ChaveriatIII Opposition No. 91182083United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: June 23, 2008Page 1 THIS OPINION Trademark Rules 2.120(a)(2) and 2.120(a)(3), as amended, allow parties to modify the discovery and trial schedule, including the deadline for making initial Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules (Final Rule), 72 Fed. Reg. 42242, 42245 (August 1, 2007).

MOTION PICTURE ASSC. v. RESPECT SPORT., 91153141 (TTAB 10-2-2007) , 91153141 (2007)

Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: October 2, 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT OF THE T.T.A.B. Before Hohein, Bucher and Cataldo, Administrative Trademark Judges. The times specified may be extended by order of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board on motion for good cause.

PROMGIRL, INC. v. JPC CO., 91190017 (TTAB 12-24-2009) , 91190017 (2009)

Opposition No. 91190017United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: December 24, 2009Page 1 THIS DECISION IS A , or if a party fails to comply with an order of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board relating to disclosure or discovery, including a protective order See Notice of FinalRulemaking, Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial and Appeal BoardRules, 72 Fed.

ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR CO. v. ADVANTAGE RENT-A-CAR, 120,101 (TTAB 3-26-2002) , 120,101 (2002)

Opposition No. 120,101United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board March 26, 2002Mailed: April 9, 2002Page 1 THIS DISPOSITION It seems hardly necessary to note that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board is an administrative tribunal, established by statute for narrow and specific dilution under Trademark Act § 43(c),[fn9] a holding which was affirmed on appeal.

IN RE WILLIAM B. SIEGEL, 75/539,620 (TTAB 10-11-2001) , 75/539,620 (2001)

Siegel Serial No. 75/539,620United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board October 11, 2001Page 1 THIS DISPOSITION IS NOT With respect to the request for remand, applicant is advised that an application which has been considered and decided on appeal will not be reopened except Because the Board issued a final decision on appeal on July 20, 2001, the Board has no authority to reopen the application to await the disposition of

THE EQUINE TOUCH FOUNDATION, INC. v. EQUINOLOGY, 92050044 (TTAB 2-10-2009) , 92050044 (2009)

Cancellation No. 92050044United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: February 10, 2009Page 1 THIS OPINION IS the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's Manual of Procedure ("TBMP") "as excusing the petitioner from making service" and that "the TTAB will make service By this notice, various rules governing Trademark Trial and Appeal Board inter partes proceedings were amended.

PEPSICO, INC. v. SIMEX, 93,359 (TTAB 11-29-2000) , 93,359 (2000)

Simex, Aussenhandelsgesellschaf tSavelsberg KG Opposition No. 93,359[fn1]United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board November Rogers Administrative Trademark Judges, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board [fn2] These papers comprise opposers' April 28, 1997 motion to file a sur-reply [fn5] The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure (TBMP) is available in printed form from the Superintendent of Documents, in CD-ROM form

CHOCOLADEFABRIKEN LINDT SPRUNGLI v. FLORES, 91187963 (TTAB 7-30-2009) , 91187963 (2009)

Karlo Flores Opposition No. 91187963United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: July 30, 2009Page 1 THIS OPINION Before Hairston, Kuhlke and Ritchie, Administrative Trademark Judges By the Board: Chocoladefabriken Lindt Sprungli AG ("opposer") has filed an opposition Trial and Appeal Board and must serve a copy of the opposition, including any exhibits, on the attorney of record for the applicant or, if there is no

CARL KARCHER ENTERPRISES v. CARL'S BAR DELI., 91188150 (TTAB 3-31-2011) , 91188150 (2011)

Opposition No. 91188150United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: March 31, 2011Page 1 THIS OPINION IS A PRECEDENT [fn4]See Miscellaneous ChangesPage 8to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules,72 Fed. Reg. 42242, 42242 (August 1, 2007). Trademark Rule 2.121(e). See also Miscellaneous Changes toTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules,72 Fed. Reg. 42242, 42246 (August 1, 2007).

IN RE MED-SURGE HOLDINGS, INC., 76635896 (TTAB 10-31-2007) , 76635896 (2007)

Serial No. 76635896United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: October 31, 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT Before Hairston, Bucher and Drost, Administrative Trademark Judges. [fn1] This case is now before the Board on appeal from the final refusal of the Trademark Examining Attorney to register this designation based upon Section

IN RE BAE SYSTEMS, 76512472 (TTAB 5-11-2007) , 76512472 (2007)

Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: May 11, 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT OF THE T.T.A.B. Tracy Cross, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 109 (Dan Vavonese, Managing Attorney) Before Walters, Holtzman, and Bergsman, Administrative Trademark The Trademark office has consistently refused to allow an applicant to amend its application to the Supplemental Register after anPage 3 appeal has been

IN RE RF MONOLITHICS, 78526998 (TTAB 8-28-2007) , 78526998 (2007)

Serial No. 78526998United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: August 28, 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT Before Hohein, Holtzman and Drost, Administrative Trademark Judges. Applicant's arguments, in essence, constitute nothing more than a rehash of those previously made in its appeal and reply briefs, and none is persuasive

IN RE VICKI ROBERTS, 76649075 (TTAB 5-2-2008) , 76649075 (2008)

IN RE VICKI ROBERTS, 76649075 (TTAB 5-2-2008) In re Vicki Roberts Serial No. 76649075United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal In addition, applicant filed with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board a notice of appeal of the examining attorney's refusal to register. In view of the examining attorney's second refusal to register the subject designation under Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, 3 and 45, the instant appeal

COOPER TECHNOLOGIES CO. v. DENIER ELECTRIC CO., 92048042 (TTAB 12-17-2008) , 92048042 (2008)

Cancellation No. 92048042United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: December 17, 2008Page 1 THIS OPINION IS By this notice, various rules governing Trademark Trial and Appeal Board inter partes proceedings are amended. See Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial and Appeal BoardRules, 72 F.R. 42242, 42256 (August 1, 2007) (comments on briefing of motions).

CORPORACION HABANOS v. RODRIGUEZ, 92052146 (TTAB 8-1-2011) , 92052146 (2011)

Rodriguez Cancellation No. 92052146United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: August 1, 2011Page 1 THIS OPINION prosecute a cancellation petition in the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the United States Patent and Trademark Office to an application to register and Appeal Board of the United States Patent and Trademark Office to the registration "PINAR DEL RIO" for cigars filed by or registered to Juan E.

CSC HOLDINGS, LLC v. SAS OPTIMHOME, 91199973 (TTAB 8-12-2011) , 91199973 (2011)

SAS Optimhome Opposition No. 91199973United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: August 12, 2011Page 1 This Decision Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure ("TBMP") § 110.09(c)(1) (3d ed. 2011) (punctuation revised). [fn2] "ESTTA" is the Electronic System for Trademark Trials and Appeals, a web-based application for filing papers electronically with the Board, and available

IN RE ROBERT M. PIRNIE, 76555048 (TTAB 6-4-2007) , 76555048 (2007)

Pirnie Serial No. 76555048United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: June 4, 2007 On Request Before Quinn, Grendel and Zervas, Administrative Trademark Judges. which the Board found unpersuasive and still finds unpersuasive.

GENERAL COUNCIL v. HERITAGE MUSIC FD., 92051525 (TTAB 2-3-2011) , 92051525 (2011)

HERITAGE MUSIC FOUNDATION Cancellation No. 92051525United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: February 3, 2011Page to Trademark Trial and Appeal BoardRules, 72 Fed. MiscellaneousChanges to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules,72 Fed. Reg. 42242 (August 1, 2007).

GALAXY METAL GEAR v. DIRECT ACCESS TECHNOLOGY, 91184213 (TTAB 8-24-2009) , 91184213 (2009)

Opposition No. 91184213United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: August 24, 2009Page 1 THIS OPINION IS A PRECEDENT OF THE T.T.A.B Cheryl Butler, Attorney, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board: In accordance with the Board's order dated May 15, 2009, opposer's first testimony Trademark Rule 2.l25.Page 11 Briefs shall be filed in accordance with Trademark Rules 2.l28(a) and (b).

RICHARD POINDEXTER v. VINCENT, 92046121 (TTAB 7-11-2008) , 92046121 (2008)

Ballard Cancellation No. 92046121 to Registration No. 3124162 issuedon August 1, 2006United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Further, even if we consider respondent to have implicitly consented to the trial of the asserted claims before the Board in view of his answer, filings [fn3] Petitioner also filed documents by notice of reliance prior to his trial period and, pursuant to the Board order of May 22, 2007, this filing has

VIBE RECORDS, INC. v. VIBE MEDIA GROUP LLC, 91176345 (TTAB 7-11-2008) , 91176345 (2008)

Vibe Media Group LLC Opposition No. 91176345United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: July 11, 2008Page 1 THIS Before Holtzman, Cataldo and Ritchie de Larena, Administrative Trademark Judges. : Correspondence to be filed with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, except notices of ex parte appeal").Page 7 Moreover, it was not appropriate under

IN RE DTI PARTNERSHIP, L.L.P., 76/197,868 (TTAB 4-10-2003) , 76/197,868 (2003)

Serial No. 76/197,868United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Malied: April 10, 2003Page 1 THIS DISPOSITION IS CITABLE The Board instituted and suspended the appeal, and remanded the application to the Trademark Examining Attorney for examination of the request for reconsideration Page 6 The Board then resumed the appeal, and applicant filed an appeal brief which essentially is a verbatim reiteration of its request for reconsideration

IN RE MASCO CORP., OF INDIANA, 77331673 (TTAB 5-24-2011) , 77331673 (2011)

., OF INDIANA, 77331673 (TTAB 5-24-2011) In re Masco Corporation of Indiana Serial No. 77331673United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: May 24, 2011Page 1 [EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] See Trademark Rule 2.142(g); Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure (TBMP) § 1218 (3d ed. rev. 2011).

IN RE HUDSON FAIRFAX GROUP, 76662560 (TTAB 11-21-2008) , 76662560 (2008)

Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: November 21, 2008Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT OF THE T.T.A.B. first time in her appeal brief took the position that INDIA was capable of functioning as a trademark. Specifically, the Board found that RING was a generic term, and that "[o]rdinarily, even if it is used with a trademark, thePage 6 generic name of a product

SCHERING-PLOUGH ANIMAL HEALTH CO. v. AQUA GEN AS, 91176641 (TTAB 3-17-2009) , 91176641 (2009)

Aqua Gen As Opposition No. 91176641United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: March 17, 2009Page 1 THIS OPINION Trademark Rule 2.l25. Briefs shall be filed in accordance with Trademark Rule 2.128(a) and (b). By this notice, various rules governing Trademark Trial and Appeal Board inter partes proceedings are amended.

BAKERY v. BENEDICT, 92047859 (TTAB 9-16-2010) , 92047859 (2010)

Benedict Cancellation No. 92047859United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: September 16, 2010Page 1 THIS OPINION See Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure ("TBMP") Section 527.01(a) (2d ed. rev. 2004). Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules (Final Rule), 63 Fed. Reg. 48,081, 48,094 (Sept. 9, 1998).

IN RE BARRIE HOUSE COFFEE CO., 76592697 (TTAB 8-7-2007) , 76592697 (2007)

Serial No. 76592697United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: August 7, 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board will ordinarily not consider additional evidence filed with the Board by the appellant or by the examiner after the Opinion evidence as to the similarity of the marks is not binding on the Board because the Board must independently evaluate the facts in a case and arrive

IN RE R B RECEIVABLES MGMT., INC., 77855168 (TTAB 9-23-2011) , 77855168 (2011)

Serial No. 77855168United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: September 23, 2011Page 1 [EDITOR'S NOTE: This case Before Walters, Kuhlke and Shaw, Administrative Trademark Judges. made for the first time in its appeal brief to amend application to seek registration on an intent-to-use basis); Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual

HIGHBEAM MARKETING v. HIGHBEAM RESEARCH, 91162372 (TTAB 1-23-2008) , 91162372 (2008)

Highbeam Research, LLC Opposition No. 91162372United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: January 23, 2008Page 1 See "Effect of December 1, 1993 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Inter Partes Proceedings," 1159 to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules," 72 Fed.

IN RE GENITOPE CORPORATION, 76470648 (TTAB 3-31-2006) , 76470648 (2006)

Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: March 31, 2006Page 1 THIS OPINION IS CITABLE AS PRECEDENT OF THE T.T.A.B. In the appeal brief the current Examining Attorney cited Section 1(a)(1)(C) of the Trademark Act as well as Trademark Rule 2.56 for this refusal. Trademark Rule 2.142(d) provides that the record in an appeal should be complete as of the filing of the appeal.

JULES JURGENSEN/RHAPSODY v. PETER BAUMBERGER, 92048667 (TTAB 7-6-2009) , 92048667 (2009)

Peter Baumberger Cancellation No. 92048667United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: July 6, 2009Page 1 THIS [fn3] SeeNotice of Final Rulemaking, Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial andAppeal Board Rules, 72 Fed. Reg. 42242 (Aug. 1, 2007). Trademark Rule 2.125. Briefs shall be filed in accordance with Trademark Rule 2.128(a) and (b).

YAHOO! INC. v. LOUFRANI, 91157129 (TTAB 5-13-2004) , 91157129 (2004)

Franklin Loufrani Opposition No. 91157129United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: May 13, 2004Page 1 THIS In attempting to make its case, opposer relies on Chapter 200 of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's Manual of Procedure (TBMP) and In reElser S.p.A the Board.

IN RE THINK, LLC, 77774652 (TTAB 9-23-2011) , 77774652 (2011)

IN RE THINK, LLC, 77774652 (TTAB 9-23-2011) In re Think, LLC Serial No. 77774652United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Before Bucher, Mermelstein and Shaw, Administrative Trademark Judges. , 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(1).Page 2 After the Trademark Examining Attorney made the refusal final, applicant appealed to this Board.

LIFE ZONE INC. v. MIDDLEMAN GROUP, 91160999 (TTAB 7-15-2008) , 91160999 (2008)

[fn1] Opposition No. 91160999 to Application No. 78307830 filed onOctober 1, 2003United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board See TRADEMARK BOARD MANUAL OF PROCEDURE ("TBMP") § 704.05(b) (2d ed. rev. 2004) (and cases cited therein). [fn6] The Trademark Rules were recently amended. See Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules, 72 Fed.

PRAKASH MELWANI v. ALLEGIANCE CORP., 91190682 (TTAB 12-29-2010) , 91190682 (2010)

Allegiance Corporation Opposition No. 91190682United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: December 29, 2010Page 1 [fn16] Both parties bear the responsibility for following the trial schedule as ordered unless and until the Board issues a suspension order or otherwise [fn13] TTABVUE refers to the "Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Inquiry System," which is the electronic record of proceedings before the Board.

IN RE JOSEPH S. PONGRATZ, 76697006 (TTAB 6-24-2011) , 76697006 (2011)

Pongratz Serial No. 76697006United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: June 24, 2011Page 1 [EDITOR'S NOTE: This Before Bucher, Zervas and Bergsman, Administrative Trademark Judges. Opinion by Bucher, Administrative Trademark Judge: Joseph S. After the Trademark Examining Attorney made the refusal final, applicant appealed to this Board.

NFL PROPERTIES LLC v. DNH MANAGEMENT, 91176569 (TTAB 1-29-2008) , 91176569 (2008)

See Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b) and Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure ("TBMP") § 509 (2d ed. rev. 2004) and cases cited therein. By this notice, various rules governing Trademark Trial and Appeal Board inter partes proceedings are amended. See Trademark Rule 2.120(a); "Miscellaneous Changes to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Rules," 72 F.R. 42242 (August 1, 2007).

O.C. SEACRETS v. HOTELPLAN ITALIA, 91190886 (TTAB 6-7-2010) , 91190886 (2010)

Opposition No. 91190886United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: June 7, 2010Page 1 THIS DECISION IS A PRECEDENT Patent and Trademark Office. Trademark Rule 2.l25. Briefs shall be filed in accordance with Trademark Rules 2.128(a) and (b).

IN RE SHARECARE, INC., 77666496 (TTAB 2-9-2009) , 77666496 (2009)

Serial No. 77666496United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Filed: February 9, 2009Mailed: June 7, 2010Page 1 EDWARD In view thereof, the Board's May 20, 2010 order is herby vacated to the extent that action on the appeal is suspended and the file is remanded to the Trademark In the event the refusal of registration is maintained, the Board shall be so informed, proceedings will be resumed and applicant will be allowed time

L. J.G. v. COSSER, 92040202 (TTAB 2007) , 92040202 (2007)

Cosser Cancellation No. 92040202United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: 14 November 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION Before Bucher, Drost and Cataldo, Administrative Trademark Judges. Opinion by Drost, Administrative Trademark Judge: On January 11, 2007, the board granted petitioner's (L. J.G.

DBC, LLC v. RENAISSANCE HERBS, INC., 91161992 (TTAB 12-7-2007) , 91161992 (2007)

Opposition No. 91161992 to application Serial No. 78262554 onreconsiderationUnited States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed Before Walters, Bucher and Cataldo, Administrative Trademark Judges. Opinion by Cataldo, Administrative Trademark Judge: On October 22, 2007, the Board issued a final decision in the above-captioned proceeding.

SMART INVENTIONS v. TMB PRODUCTS, 92043691 (TTAB 11-1-2006) , 92043691 (2006)

[fn1] Cancellation No. 92043691United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: November 1, 2006 [fn1] Assignment recorded Proceedings are resumed and discovery and trial dates are reset as indicated below. Trademark Rule 2.125. Briefs shall be filed in accordance with Trademark Rules 2.128(a) and (b).

SPRINGFIELD, INC. v. XD, 91180596 (TTAB 2-7-2008) , 91180596 (2008)

XD Opposition No. 91180596United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: February 7, 2008Page 1 THIS DISPOSITION Before Sams, Chief Administrative Trademark Judge, and Rogers and Mermelstein, Administrative Trademark Judges. [fn2] Trademark Rules 2.111(a) and 2.111(c)(4) contain parallel provisions relating to petitions to cancel.

SCHOTT AG v. SCOTT, 91184239 (TTAB 11-13-2008) , 91184239 (2008)

L'Wren Scott Opposition No. 91184239Opposition No. 91184245United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: November 13 Before Seeherman, Rogers and Taylor, Administrative Trademark Judges. By this notice, various rules governing Trademark Trial and Appeal Board inter partes proceedings were amended.

IN RE WIELAND DENTAL + TECHNIK GMBH CO., 76514103 (TTAB 12-28-2007) , 76514103 (2007)

Serial No. 76514103United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: December 28, 2007Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A Before Hohein, Walters and Walsh, Administrative Trademark Judges. and the prevailing authorities, the Board erred in reaching the decision it issued.

IN RE RENEWABLE LUBRICANTS, INC., 77479764 (TTAB 2-9-2011) , 77479764 (2011)

Serial No. 77479764United States Patent and Trademark OfficeTrademark Trial and Appeal Board Mailed: February 9, 2011Page 1 THIS OPINION IS NOT A PRECEDENT The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board will ordinarily not consider additional evidence filed with the Board by the appellant or by the examiner after the The Board may consider evidence submitted after appeal despite its untimeliness, if the non-offering party (1) does not object to the evidence and (2)