TTABulator

Proceeding No.

Date

TTAB Disposition

Precedent?

Notes

91196412

N

77534583

N

77671449

N

77832668

N

77921755

N

85064187

N

85065751

N

Refusal affirmed. Applicant’s prior registration irrelevant: “Applicant also raises the argument in its brief that that its predecessor in interest previously owned a registration for the same mark for “retail clothing boutiques” which was inadvertently cancelled due to the failure to file a Section 8 affidavit. Applicant’s Brief, p. 3. Applicant contends that the marks coexisted on the register for over six years without any instances of actual confusion. We are not persuaded.”

Applicant’s cancelled registration cannot justify registration

of its current application.

85082505

N

91199193

N

91192593

N

91170112

N

91187787

N

91195158

N

91203482

N

92054391

N

NOTE: Board already indicated in an order that “We would be inclined to grant respondent’s Motion for Relief from Final Judgment.”

91200355

N

91200910

N

91201549

N

91201070

N

91202073

N

91200183

N

92054730

N

91197005

N

91197661

N

91198154

N

91200806

N

91201858

N

Proceeding No.

Date

TTAB Disposition

Precedent?

Notes

92048578

N

92050834

N

94002441

N

76676618

N

77314375

N

77500870

N

77713799

N

77777885

N

77785797

N

NOTE – the third party registration showing the goods are similar appear to be house marks or store names that cover many products.

77920248

N

79081140

N

85015573

N

85021590

N

85034692

N

85063769

Y

85079173

N

85123800

N

77005059

N

85230910

N

77440023

N

92055368

N

91199964

N

91198172

N

Note:  Opposer has subsequently withdrawn the Opposition.

91198440

N

Requests 15 to 25 related to the accuracy of documents produced by Opposer and third parties. The motion was also denied as to these RFAs.

91199529

N

91203538

N

91204338

N

91170868

N

Note: The proceeding lasted for 6 years. Opposer’s evidence included a survey.

Will it be appealed?

91191683

N

91180851

N

91192340

N

91195088

N

91195090

N

92053739

N

91192645

N

91125116

N

91176159

N

91194679

N

91201700

N

91203721

N

91202201

N

91199542

N

91198263

N

92053738

N

“• respondent’s concession that there is a likelihood of confusion between the parties’ marks is accepted, and petitioner need not prove likelihood of confusion at trial, as it is now established;

• discovery is closed for respondent;”

• petitioner is entitled to follow-up discovery within the time period set herein; and

• petitioner shall promptly bring any further discovery deficiencies to the Board’s attention and the issue will be promptly resolved via teleconference, and in the event respondent fails to participate in such a teleconference, or the discovery process, as ordered, judgment shall be entered against respondent on petitioner’s motion.

In other words, the only issues remaining for trial are priority and laches.

91198182

N

91200192

N

91201700

N

91204116

N