[E-trademarks] [EXT] Re: Letter of Protest: anonymous?

Thu Apr 11 09:44:18 EDT 2024

"Premature Use"? Never heard of that one!

Pam

Pamela S. Chestek
Chestek Legal
300 Fayetteville St.
Unit 2492
Raleigh, NC 27602
+1 919-800-8033
pamela at chesteklegal.com
www.chesteklegal.com

On 4/10/2024 9:41 PM, Laura Geyer via E-trademarks wrote:
>
> Alex:
>
> I’ve had a number of LOPs accepted over the years, and I always tell 
> clients that:
>
>  1. It’s absolutely confidential as an initial matter, and if not
>     granted, it’s pretty safe to assume nobody but G-d and an
>     unidentified person on the PTO staff will know about it, BUT
>  2. If granted, and especially if the applicant is aware of your
>     existence, there’s a chance that they’ll /guess/ who is
>     responsible especially if your mark is the only one cited. If it’s
>     one of those 13 mark 2(d)s 🙄🙄🙄 you might squeak past, but if
>     it’s the corporate equivalent of a national security concern then:
>  3. Just assume that it could be found out by FOIA or accidentally
>     entered into the record somehow in the process and make your
>     dispositions accordingly.
>
> It’s just such a useful tool that it’s worth the risk. I’m not aware 
> of one of mine that leaked but certainly it wouldn’t take a master 
> carpenter to sort out who’d filed it in some of those cases. I do 
> remember back when the “Trademark King” filed to register something 
> like 80 trademark applications a number of which incorporated famous 
> trademarks (like, say, Mercedes) or famous people’s names like Elton 
> John or a bunch of generic things like “Holiday Sale” (resulting in 
> office action responses I treasure to this day) all for “trademark 
> branding”. There was a rain of LOPs in lots of the famous mark 
> applications, many of which were passed on to the examiners and 2(d)s 
> issued (that probably would have issued anyway). I mean, it could have 
> been a random Concerned Citizen, but the smart money would have been 
> on the brand owners… 😉
>
> “Who was the Trademark King,” those of you who are not old like me 
> might ask … just a few screenshots from one of his efforts.
>
> The summary of issues that repeated for multiple office actions:
>
> The King appealed to the Commissioner – Sir Elton had slept upon his 
> rights! He was lazy!
>
> When the Examiner remained obdurate, the Trademark King appealed to a 
> higher authority:
>
> Alas, it all ended in abandonment.
>
> Have a great evening!
>
> Laura Talley Geyer (she/her)
>
> Of Counsel
>
> /ND Galli Law LLC/
>
> 1200 G Street, N.W., Ste 800
>
> Washington, DC
>
> Tel: (202) 599-9019 (direct)
>
> https://ndgallilaw.com/laura-geyer/
>
> *From:*E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> *On 
> Behalf Of *Alex Butterman via E-trademarks
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 10, 2024 3:54 PM
> *To:* For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek 
> legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> *Cc:* Alex Butterman <abutterman at dbllawyers.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [E-trademarks] [EXT] Re: Letter of Protest: anonymous?
>
> *EXTERNAL EMAIL*
>
> That’s a good question. I have a fed government agency client that 
> figured their Letters of Protest could be discovered by a FOIA request.
>
> *Alex Butterman*
>
> Partner****
>
> *DUNLAP **BENNETT **& LUDWIG*
>
> /211 Church St., SE; Leesburg, VA 20175/
>
> T: 703-777-7319– *BIO* 
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.dbllawyers.com%2fattorney%2falex-butterman%2f&c=E,1,UshTsoBWZU1f2Sbg3CmfPDGZcB3B6JXceNOUjacPR2vAJTmqsbBRtm1o-65q66XFALwuow-pKbG9R-mUrU0kcLfhL_ORSGaW6yWB5xGlLZnX&typo=1>
>
> A blue and white logo Description automatically generated
>
> This electronic message contains information from Dunlap Bennett & 
> Ludwig PLLC and may be confidential or privileged. If you are not the 
> intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or use of the contents is 
> prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify 
> us and delete the message without copying or disclosing it.
>
> *From:*E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> *On 
> Behalf Of *Crane, Susan via E-trademarks
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 10, 2024 08:06 AM
> *To:* For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek 
> legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> *Cc:* Crane, Susan <susan.crane at wyndham.com>
> *Subject:* [EXT] Re: [E-trademarks] Letter of Protest: anonymous?
>
> True, but is it possible you can file a FOIA request to get the 
> original letter?
>
> Susan L. Crane
> Group Vice President, Legal
> Intellectual Property, Brands & Marketing
>
> Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc.
> 22 Sylvan Way
> Parsippany, NJ 07054
> O (973) 753-6455
> M (973) 879-3420
> Susan.Crane at wyndham.Com
>
>     On Apr 10, 2024, at 8:04 AM, Michael Brown via E-trademarks
>     <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
>
>     
>
>     The Letter of Protest does not get sent to the applicant, nor is
>     it part of the TSDR record. However, if approved, a memorandum
>     from the Office of the Deputy Commissioner to the Examining
>     Attorney with the relevant information for consideration
>
>     ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
>
>     *This Message Is From an External Sender *
>
>     Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
>     sender and know the content is safe.
>
>     *  Report Suspicious *
>     <https://us-phishalarm-ewt.proofpoint.com/EWT/v1/Nf401RNTQFE14GfWW3o!ksaLCl7KIOx0I-lfcXtIkMx5sgXJCe0LohVDnZgLBw8hhHgd8DHnxMPGnuS5jjraJ7-te1yKFmvhdagr-fnS18_coEAkuHHwOAClbbjYrSyrxAr6iuMxM2pWpExQLw$>  ‌
>
>
>     ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
>
>     The Letter of Protest does not get sent to the applicant, nor is
>     it part of the TSDR record. However, if approved, a memorandum
>     from the Office of the Deputy Commissioner to the Examining
>     Attorney with the relevant information for consideration is part
>     of the TSDR record, so if there is information that would identify
>     the Protestor, that might give it away.
>
>     If you are interested, contact me off list, and I can point you to
>     a case or two where I had LoPs accepted.
>
>     Best regards,
>     Michael
>
>
>     Michael Brown
>     Michael J Brown Law Office
>
>     354 Eisenhower Parkway
>
>     Plaza I, 2nd Floor, Suite 2025
>
>     Livingston, NJ 07039
>
>     michaeljbrownlaw at gmail.com
>
>     michael at mjbrownlaw.com
>
>     www.mjbrownlaw.com
>     <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.mjbrownlaw.com__;!!Nf401RNTQFE14GfWW3o!hYyGRU1up_s3RYBVeL5V6iV28bNVldBOJRMWOtNiqb8y-5Jb8u3DAES83vDWw29kEN4ezAtYFnVb4b5xvJ1CutOLFpkyERA$>
>
>     +1 973-577-6300  fax +1 973-577-6301
>
>     Google Voice +1 973-637-0358
>
>     On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 3:05 AM Judith S via E-trademarks
>     <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
>
>         Hi All,
>
>         I have a small client who is contemplating filing a Letter of
>         Protest against a larger competitor who filed a trademark for
>         a term they consider generic or descriptive of the technology
>         they use.
>
>         They are concerned that if they are identified as the
>         "Protestor" there might be retaliation.
>
>         The "Name of Protestor" field instruction says "Enter the full
>         legal name of the entity objecting to the registration of a
>         mark in a pending application, i.e., the name of the
>         individual, corporation, partnership, or other entity that is
>         protesting registration of a mark, NOT the person or firm
>         completing the Letter of Protest."
>
>         Could we use the name of the in-house attorney who is
>         initiating the objection or some other name?
>
>         Thanks for any insight.
>
>         Judith
>
>         -- 
>         E-trademarks mailing list
>         E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com
>         http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com
>         <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com__;!!Nf401RNTQFE14GfWW3o!hYyGRU1up_s3RYBVeL5V6iV28bNVldBOJRMWOtNiqb8y-5Jb8u3DAES83vDWw29kEN4ezAtYFnVb4b5xvJ1CutOL_nmiKSQ$>
>
>     -- 
>     E-trademarks mailing list
>     E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com
>     https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com__;!!Nf401RNTQFE14GfWW3o!hYyGRU1up_s3RYBVeL5V6iV28bNVldBOJRMWOtNiqb8y-5Jb8u3DAES83vDWw29kEN4ezAtYFnVb4b5xvJ1CutOL_nmiKSQ$
>     <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com__;!!Nf401RNTQFE14GfWW3o!hYyGRU1up_s3RYBVeL5V6iV28bNVldBOJRMWOtNiqb8y-5Jb8u3DAES83vDWw29kEN4ezAtYFnVb4b5xvJ1CutOL_nmiKSQ$>
>
>
> This email message (including all attachments) is for the sole use of 
> the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential information. If 
> you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply 
> email and destroy all copies of the original message. Unless otherwise 
> indicated in the body of this email, nothing in this communication is 
> intended to operate as an electronic signature and this transmission 
> cannot be used to form, document, or authenticate a contract. Wyndham 
> Hotels and Resorts and/or its affiliates may monitor all incoming and 
> outgoing email communications in the United States, including the 
> content of emails and attachments, for security, legal compliance, 
> training, quality assurance and other purposes.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240411/a757db8a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 55909 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240411/a757db8a/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 35081 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240411/a757db8a/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 319634 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240411/a757db8a/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 25730 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240411/a757db8a/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 34793 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240411/a757db8a/attachment-0004.png>