[E-trademarks] Relation Back

[John L. Welch]

It is a great question.

Let’s assume that the cancellation claim is based on Section 2(d) and so a petition can no longer be filed directly with the USPTO/TTAB due to the 5-year “statute of limitations” of Section 14.

I would think about whether it is possible to get the judge to issue an order directing the USPTO to institute the cancellation proceeding. Seemingly that would require a re-opening of the case, or maybe just an amended complaint and a motion of some sort.

JLW



[cid:image001.png at 01DA58ED.A320F330]

John L. Welch
Counsel
Admitted to Practice: Massachusetts, New York, and Washington, DC
jwelch at WolfGreenfield.com<mailto:jwelch at WolfGreenfield.com>
Tel. 617.646.8285
[cid:image002.jpg at 01DA58ED.A320F330]<http://thettablog.blogspot.com/>

Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
BOSTON | NEW YORK | WASHINGTON DC

wolfgreenfield.com<https://www.wolfgreenfield.com/>  [cid:image003.png at 01DA58ED.A320F330] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/wolf-greenfield/>  [cid:image004.png at 01DA58ED.A320F330] <https://twitter.com/wolfgreenfield>

Please consider the environment before printing this email.


This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify me immediately by replying to this message and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. Thank you.

From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf Of reidl--- via E-trademarks
Sent: Saturday, February 3, 2024 3:40 PM
To: 'For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice.' <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: reidl at sbcglobal.net
Subject: Re: [E-trademarks] Relation Back

That’s an excellent question.

I think the Plaintiff could file a cancellation petition but not on 2 (d) grounds.  The Board would likely view 15 USCS § 1064 as quasi-jurisdictional because it specifically refers to a “petition to cancel a registration,” which is a Board proceeding not a Federal Court action. If the 2 (d)  petition was filed after the five year period, the Board could not hear it.  The Federal action should be irrelevant in the analysis.

Remember, there is no independent cause of action in Federal Court for cancellation; it results from the Court’s authority to cancel registrations “in any action” under 15 USC § 1119.

Paul


Paul W. Reidl
Dickenson, Peatman & Fogarty
1455 1st St #301
Napa, CA 94559
707-261-7010 x 7210
preidl at dpf-law.com<mailto:preidl at dpf-law.com>
@TMGuy



From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com>> On Behalf Of Marc Randazza via E-trademarks
Sent: Saturday, February 3, 2024 8:34 AM
To: e-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>>
Cc: Marc Randazza <mjr at randazza.com<mailto:mjr at randazza.com>>
Subject: [E-trademarks] Relation Back

Grounds on which cancellation action may be brought under 15 USCS § 1064 are limited for registration that has been in existence for five years.

Plaintiff files infringement and cancellation action within the five year period in district court.

District court dismisses claim with leave to amend.

Five year period has run.

Can Plaintiff file just the cancellation proceeding at the TTAB?  It is outside the 5 year period, but would the district court action be a proper event to relate back to, or does the TTAB start the clock ticking today?
--

______________________________________

Marc John Randazza, JD, MAMC, LLM* | Randazza Legal Group
4974 South Rainbow Boulevard, Suite 100, Las Vegas, NV 89118
30 Western Avenue, Gloucester, MA 01930
2 S Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2680, Miami, FL 33131
Tel: 702-420-2001 | Email: mjr at randazza.com<mailto:mjr at randazza.com>
Firm Offices - Las Vegas | Miami | New England
______________________________________

* Licensed to practice law in Arizona, California, Florida, Massachusetts, and Nevada
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240206/0ce53904/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1575 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240206/0ce53904/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 23449 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240206/0ce53904/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 590 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240206/0ce53904/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 735 bytes
Desc: image004.png
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240206/0ce53904/attachment-0002.png>