[E-trademarks] Extension of time to oppose based on Settlement Discussions, even though there are none

[Robert Rosenthal]

TBMP Section 211.01 provides for a request for reconsideration of an order of the Board on a request for extension of time to oppose, and advises that there is an ESTTA form for the request for reconsideration. TBMP 211.02 provides for relief after the institution has been filed and instituted, and includes the following in a footnote:  Central Manufacturing Inc. v. Third Millennium Tech. Inc., 61 USPQ2d 1210, 1215 (TTAB 2001) (motion to dismiss granted where it was found that opposer’s allegations of consent and good cause for extension request were untrue).

Robert E. Rosenthal
Attorney-at-Law
Registered Patent Attorney
Howard IP Law Group, P.C.
P.O. Box 226
Fort Washington, PA 19034
Ph: 215-542-5824
Mobile: 267-252-7539
Fax: 215-542-5825
rrosenthal at phd-ip.com

This e-mail is confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. To do so could violate state and Federal privacy laws. Thank you for your cooperation. Please call Robert Rosenthal at 215-542-5824 if you have any questions.

From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf Of Stephen McArthur via E-trademarks
Sent: Friday, June 7, 2024 5:51 PM
To: Carl Oppedahl <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Stephen McArthur <stephen at smcarthurlaw.com>
Subject: [E-trademarks] Extension of time to oppose based on Settlement Discussions, even though there are none

I assume the answer is "No" here, but I thought I'd ask the braintrust just in case.

Assume someone files a "First 90 Day Request for Extension of Time to Oppose for Good Cause" against your client's trademark application. They choose as the good cause: "The potential opposer is engaged in settlement discussions with applicant".

However, the potential opposer has never contacted us. There are no communications at all, much less an engagement of settlement discussions.

Is there any recourse here to somehow get the extension rejected, even after it has been automatically approved?

The McArthur Law Firm
Stephen Charles McArthur
8383 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 800
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
(424) 258-6815
www.smcarthurlaw.com<http://www.smcarthurlaw.com>

This email, including any attachments, may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or attorney work product, or inside information, for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient or if you received this message in error, please notify us and delete all copies. Sender reserves and asserts all rights to confidentiality, including all privileges and copyrights that may apply. Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240607/028e1bc6/attachment.html>