`Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
`P.O. Box 1451
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1451
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Mailed: April 18, 2012
`
`In re Kent G. Anderson
`
`Serial No. 76486806
`
`Filed: 2/3/2003
`
`
`
`
`EJS
`
`
`
`
`KENT G ANDERSON
`FUTURE VISIONARIES
`925 N GRIFFIN ST
`BISMARCK , ND 58501-3478
`
`
`
`Clara Vela, Paralegal Specialist:
`
`Applicant's communication, filed on April 2, 2012, is
`
`
`
`noted. It appears that applicant is appealing from the
`
`refusal of the examining attorney that issued on March 12,
`
`2012. The appeal is hereby instituted. Applicant has also
`
`submitted what he has captioned as an appeal brief, to which
`
`are attached hundreds of pages of documents, many of which
`
`do not appear to have been previously made of record.
`
`Therefore, in order to have them considered, we are treating
`
`applicant's submission, despite being called an "appeal
`
`brief," as a request for reconsideration. The request for
`
`reconsideration requires consideration by the examining
`
`attorney. Accordingly, proceedings in the appeal are hereby
`
`suspended, and the application is remanded to the examining
`
`
`
`
`Application Serial No. 76486806
`
`
`attorney for consideration of the April 2, 2012 submission.
`
`If registration is found as a result of this submission, the
`
`appeal will be moot. If the refusal of registration is
`
`maintained, the examining attorney should so indicate in an
`
`Office action, which may include argument and evidence. The
`
`"six-months-response" clause should be omitted from the
`
`Office action. The application should be returned to the
`
`Board, which will resume proceedings in the appeal and allow
`
`applicant time to file his appeal brief. Applicant is
`
`advised that it is not necessary to submit as exhibits to an
`
`appeal brief papers, including Office actions and responses,
`
`that are already of record, and the Board strongly
`
`discourages applicants from doing so.