From: Habeeb, Myriah
`
`Sent: 4/17/2012 1:27:10 PM
`
`To: TTAB EFiling
`
`CC:
`
`Subject: U.S. TRADEMARK APPLICATION NO. 79090855 - SWEDA - 1011-TM-
`1247 - Request for Reconsideration Denied - Return to TTAB - Message 1 of 7
`
`
`
`*************************************************
`Attachment Information:
`Count: 14
`Files: ATTACHMENT PAGES_Page_01.jpg, pph-1.jpg, pph-2.jpg, ATTACHMENT
`PAGES_Page_02.jpg, Source Information Major US Newspapers n_Page_1.jpg, Source
`Information Major US Newspapers n_Page_2.jpg, ATTACHMENT
`PAGES_Page_03.jpg, BODY__caps__sweda___and_not__Page_01.jpg,
`BODY__caps__sweda___and_not__Page_02.jpg,
`BODY__caps__sweda___and_not__Page_03.jpg,
`BODY__caps__sweda___and_not__Page_04.jpg,
`BODY__caps__sweda___and_not__Page_05.jpg,
`BODY__caps__sweda___and_not__Page_06.jpg, 79090855.doc
`
`

`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
`OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
`
` APPLICATION SERIAL NO.
`
`79090855
`
`
`
` MARK: SWEDA
`
`
`
`
` CORRESPONDENT ADDRESS:
`
` KATHLEEN A COSTIGAN
`
` HEDMAN & COSTIGAN PC
` 1230 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS FL 7
` NEW YORK, NY 10020-1517
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`*79090855*
`
`
`
`
`GENERAL TRADEMARK INFORMATION:
`http://www.uspto.gov/main/trademarks.htm
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` DITRON S.R.L.
`
` APPLICANT:
`
` CORRESPONDENT’S REFERENCE/DOCKET NO:
` 1011-TM-1247
` CORRESPONDENT E-MAIL ADDRESS:
` ipdocket@hgcpatent.com
`
`
`
`
`
`REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED
`
`
`
`
`
`ISSUE/MAILING DATE: 4/17/2012
`
`INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION NO. 1060702
`
`
`
`This Denial of the Request for Reconsideration responds to applicant’s
`communication dated 03/22/2012 where applicant:
`
`
`(1) Amended the identification of goods;
`
`(2) Argued against the Section 2(d) Likelihood of Confusion Refusal; and
`
`(3) Argued against the Section 2(e)(4) Primarily Merely a Surname Refusal.
`
`
`
`The examining attorney has reviewed the applicant’s response and determined the
`following:
`
`
`(1) Applicant’s amended identification of goods is acceptable and made of record;
`
`
`

`
`(2) Applicant’s arguments against the Section 2(d) Likelihood of Confusion Refusal
`are persuasive and the refusal is withdrawn; and
`
`(3) Applicant’s arguments against the Section 2(e)(4) Primarily Merely a Surname
`Refusal are not persuasive and the final refusal is maintained and continued.
`
`
`
`SECTION 2(E)(4) – PRIMARILY MERELY A SURNAME FINAL REFUSAL
`MAINTAINED AND CONTINUED
`
`The trademark examining attorney has carefully reviewed applicant’s request for
`reconsideration and is denying the request for the reasons stated below. See 37 C.F.R.
`§2.64(b); TMEP §§715.03(a), 715.04(a). The Section 2(e)(4) Primarily Merely a
`Surname Refusal made final in the Office action dated 09/19/2011 is maintained and
`continues to be final. See TMEP §§715.03(a), 715.04(a).
`
`In the present case, applicant’s request has not resolved the outstanding refusal, nor does
`it raise a new issue or provide any new or compelling evidence with regard to the
`outstanding refusal in the final Office action. In addition, applicant’s analysis and
`arguments are not persuasive nor do they shed new light on the issues. Accordingly, the
`request is denied.
`
`Specifically, as detailed in the final Office action, the surname SWEDA regularly
`appears in news media in the manner of a surname, the term has no other recognized
`meaning other than as a surname, the term has the structure and pronunciation of a
`surname and the mark has no stylization or design elements to change the primary
`significance of the mark. For those reasons, purchasers encountering applicant’s goods
`bearing the mark SWEDA will immediately and primarily understand that term as a
`surname.
`
`
`
`Applicant argues:
`
`
`
`(1) The surname SWEDA is rare because 188 hits in the context of a population
`in excess of 300 million is insufficient proof of the primary significance of the
`mark;
`
`
`Initially, the examining attorney notes that the fact that a term is not a common surname
`does not mean that a surname would not be considered to be primarily merely a surname.
`See In re Adrian Giger and Thomas Giger, 78 USPQ2d 1405, 1408 (TTAB 2006). See
`also In re E. Martinoni Co., 189 USPQ 589, 590 (TTAB 1975); and In re Industrie
`Pirelli Societa per Azioni, 9 USPQ2d 1564, 1566 (TTAB 1988).
`
`Applicant’s argument that 188 hits is in the context of 300 million people is insufficient
`evidence of the surname significance of the mark is unpersuasive. As articulated in In re
`
`

`
`Gregory, 70 USPQ2d 1792, 1795 (TTAB 2004) “[g]iven the large number of different
`surnames in the United States, even the most common surnames would represent but
`small fractions of such a database.” Ultimately, in order to sustain the Section 2(e)(4)
`refusal, the evidence of record must establish that the primary significance of the mark is
`as a surname.
`
`Here, the surname evidence of record establishes that there are at least 188 households in
`the United States with the name Sweda. Given that an average American household
`includes 2.6 people, there are likely to be at least 487 people with the surname SWEDA.
`See Attachment 1 – U.S. Census Bureau USA country quick facts. Moreover, the
`surname search results included in the 02/11/2011 Office action show that these
`household are located all throughout the United States, including in Florida, Oregon,
`Pennsylvania, New York, Michigan, Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Illinois, Wisconsin and
`California. This combined with the fact that the term SWEDA has no other known
`meaning will lead purchasers to the conclusion that SWEDA is a surname.
`
`
`
`(2) The eight newspaper and magazines articles submitted with the final Office
`action are insufficient to establish widespread and consistent use of the term
`SWEDA as a surname;
`
`
`Applicant asserts that the newspaper and magazines articles of record are insufficient to
`establish widespread and consistent use of the term SWEDA as a surname. Moreover,
`applicant argues that even if all two hundred articles were of record, based on the number
`of publications in the United States, 200 is inconsequential and insufficient. This
`argument is unpersuasive.
`
`First, the examining attorney did not conduct a search of the mark in the 1400 daily or
`6000 weekly newspapers but in the Lexis database of Major US Newspaper, which
`includes 48 English language newspapers published in the United States and that appear
`in the top 50 in circulation in Editor & Publisher Year Book. See Attachment 2 –
`LexisNexis® source information for Major US Newspapers database. These newspapers
`should provide a representative sample of the nature and types of articles an average
`purchaser encounters.
`
`These articles, which spotlight, reference or were written by people with the surname
`SWEDA, include obituaries, school news, law and order, editorials, local news,
`professional news and sports, all across the United States. See Attachment 3 – additional
`LexisNexis® search results for SWEDA; see also Attachment 4 – LexisNexis® showing
`1167 search results in 48 total publications. The evidence attached previously and herein
`aptly demonstrates that an average American purchaser is likely to encounter the term
`SWEDA in the media, used as a surname on a regular and consistent basis.
`
`Finally, based on all of the evidence of record – the surname search results, the negative
`dictionary, translation and geographic gazetteer results, and the term regularly appearing
`in the media used as a surname – the examining attorney has met the initial burden of
`
`

`
`establishing a prima facie case that a mark is primarily merely a surname. The burden
`then shifts to the applicant to rebut this showing. In re Petrin Corp., 231 USPQ 902, 902-
`03 (TTAB 1986). Applicant’s evidence of the population of the United States and the
`first page of a Wikipedia list of US newspapers has failed to rebut this showing.
`
`Ultimately, based on the evidence attached previously and herein, when purchasers
`encounter applicant’s goods using the mark SWEDA, they will immediately understand
`the primary significance of the mark as that of a surname. Therefore, the final refusal to
`register pursuant to Section 2(e)(4) of the Trademark Act is maintained and continued.
`
`
`
`Advisory – Applicant May Amend to Principal Register Under Section 2(f)
`
`If applicant believes that its mark has acquired distinctiveness in the United States, that
`is, that it has become a distinctive source indicator for the goods, applicant may seek
`registration on the Principal Register under Trademark Act Section 2(f). See 15 U.S.C.
`§1052(f); TMEP §§1010, 1212.08. The Office will decide each case on its own merits.
`
`The following factors are generally considered when determining whether a mark has
`acquired distinctiveness based on extrinsic evidence: (1) length and exclusivity of use of
`the mark in the United States by applicant; (2) the type, expense and amount of
`advertising of the mark in the United States; and (3) applicant’s efforts in the United
`States to associate the mark with the source of the goods and/or services, such as
`unsolicited media coverage and consumer studies. See In re Steelbuilding.com, 415 F.3d
`1293, 1300, 75 USPQ2d 1420, 1424 (Fed. Cir. 2005). A showing of acquired
`distinctiveness need not consider all of these factors, and no single factor is
`determinative. In re Steelbuilding.com, 415 F.3d at 1300, 75 USPQ2d at 1424; see
`TMEP §§1212 et seq.
`
`Evidence of acquired distinctiveness may include specific dollar sales under the mark,
`advertising figures, samples of advertising, consumer or dealer statements of recognition
`of the mark as a source identifier, affidavits, and any other evidence that establishes the
`distinctiveness of the mark as an indicator of source. See 37 C.F.R. §2.41(a); In re Ideal
`Indus., Inc., 508 F.2d 1336, 184 USPQ 487 (C.C.P.A. 1975); In re Instant Transactions
`Corp., 201 USPQ 957 (TTAB 1979); TMEP §§1212.06 et seq.
`
`To establish acquired distinctiveness, an applicant may rely only on use in
`commerce that may be regulated by the United States Congress. See 15 U.S.C.
`§§1052(f), 1127. Use solely in a foreign country or between two foreign countries is not
`evidence of acquired distinctiveness in the United States. In re Rogers, 53 USPQ2d
`1741, 1746-47 (TTAB 1999); TMEP §§1010, 1212.08.
`
`
`
`Advisory – Amendment to Supplemental Register Not Available
`
`
`
`

`
`Applicant cannot overcome the refusal by amending the application to the Supplemental
`Register. A mark in an application under Trademark Act Section 66(a) is not eligible for
`registration on the Supplemental Register. 37 C.F.R. §§2.47(c), 2.75(c); TMEP §816.01;
`see 15 U.S.C. §1141h(a)(4).
`
`RESPONDING TO THIS DENIAL OF THE REQUEST FOR
`RECONSIDERATION
`
`Therefore, because the request for reconsideration does not overcome the issues on
`appeal, no new issue is presented therein, and the final Section 2(e)(4) Primarily Merely a
`Surname refusal is maintained and continued, the Board will be notified to resume the
`appeal. See TMEP §715.04(a).
`
`If the applicant has any questions or needs further assistance, please telephone the
`assigned examining attorney.
`
`
`/Myriah A. Habeeb/
`Myriah A. Habeeb
`Trademark Examining Attorney
`Law Office 105
`Phone: 571.272.8909
`Email: Myriah.Habeeb@uspto.gov
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`ATTACHMENT #1
`
`
`
`

`
`htlD.//0uici<iact5.ceri5u5Liovfufd/5tate5f00000 htmi
`
`04/17/2012 12 08 32 PM
`
`U.S. Censtts Bureau State & County QuickFact5
`
`
`
`select a Stale |
`USA
`
`| usn Quir:ki=ar:ts i
`
`i Whal:‘s New
`
`
`
`FAQ
`
`0 Further inturmatiuri
`Peolfieflllrckfads
`€}_P0pulation, 2011 estimate
`0_P0puiation, 2010
`0_Popu|ation, percent change, 2000 to 2010
`0_F'0p£llali0t'I, 2000
`0_Pers0n5 under 5 years, percent. 2010
`0_.Persm1s under 10 years, percent, 2010
`9_Person5 65 years and over. percent. 2010
`9_Femaie persons, percent, 2010
`
`USA
`
`31 1,591,917
`306,745,538
`9.?”/.
`281,421,906
`6.5%
`240%
`13.0%
`50.6%
`
`
`0_Biac1t persons, percent, 2010 (3.)
`12.6%
`0_American intiian and Alaska Native persons, percent. 2010 (a)
`0.9%
`I}_As>afJ persons, percent, 2010 (3)
`40%
`fl_Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific lsiander, percent, 2010 (a)
`0.2%
`0,-Persons.repon1'ng twoor more races, percent, 2010
`2.9%
`0_Per5on5 of Hispanic or Latino origin. percent. 2010 (D)
`16.3%
`0_wttile persons not Hispanic, percent, 2010
`631%
`
`
`flforeign born persons, peiI:eni_ 2006-2010
`121%
`€}_Language other than Erigiisn spoken at home, pct age 5+, 20062010
`201%
`0_HEgtt scirooi graduates. percent or persons age 25+. 20002010
`35.0%
`0_Bacne|oi‘5 degree or higher. pct of persons age 25+. 200&2010
`27.9%
`0_vete:an-3, 2006-2010
`22,652,-196
`0_Mean travei time tcr work (minutes), wnrkers age 16+, 2006-2010
`252
`0_.H0using units, 2010
`131,704,730
`9_i-mirieownership rate, 200&2010
`66.6%
`0;-iousing unrts in mt.iEtH.init structures, percent, 20062010
`25.9%
`0_Median value ofowner-occupied housing units. 2006-2010
`$188,400
`0_HOll':-.eh0l(‘J3, 2006-2010
`114,235,9%
`0, 2005-2010
`250
`0_Percapi1a money il'ICOR\E In past 12 tTl0flIhS (2010 doilars) 20062010
`$27,334
`0_Median househoid income 200(‘r201O
`3951.914
`0_i=er_=.ons below poverty ievei, percent, 2o0e2010
`13.8%
`
`
`
`

`
`htlD.//Uuickfact5.cen5u5.00\/fufd/5tate5f00000 mm!
`
`04/17/2012 12 08 32 PM
`
`v_mwu:. unuur pv.M:ny It-:vcI,puu-.1I|,Luuo—;I.rI\r
`
`no.0?!
`
`usn
`
`Busires-.3 thlhfirfacts
`7,433,465
`0_Pnva1e nonfarm estabfishmenb, 2009
`114,509,626
`0_Prwa1e nonfamr erwkwlnerrl, 2009
`0.4%
`0_Privale nonfarm l. percent change 2000—2009
`0_NonempIrJyer estaussnnrems, 2009
`21,090,761
`
`'¢i_Toté£i1}i:i{z5érBi'rir}i1'sIf2i1ii7
` " '
`0_fl!ac1r-munedflrnrs, percent; 2007
`7,111.
`0_American lnd;aa1— and Araska Native-mined firms, percent, 2007
`0.9%
`0_As:an-omen inns, percent, 2007
`-5.751.
`Gflalnre Hawairan and Other Panfic lsiander-owned fimi5.perce:1I.20()7
`(I,1'¥.
`0_H'EpanirH)wI1ed Iinns. percent, 2007
`0,351.
`0_Women-owned nuns, percem, 2007
`25,390
`
`-
`smpu-en .
`)
`.
`.
`.
`1
`0_Mercnam wholesaier sares, 2007 ($1000)
`4,174,205,515
`flfierai sales, 2007 ($1000)
`3.9-17.%,456
`0_Re1au sakes per capua, 2007
`$12,990
`0_Ancunuuoaa1ioi1 and mm semces sales. 2007 ($1000)
`013,795,732
`0_Bui1dmg permits, 2010
`604,610
`0_Fede1'al spending, 2009
`3_1—,5_335_0m1
`Gnnqlaplly quura-.15
`um
`G_Land area m square miles, 2010
`0_Pecs-ans per square nie, 2010
`1hunnt=sn§:xanmnraki:ua:hys1aIe
`DBw0|0adMefuHdaLasel
`Po;mHn0nasiI1Btesf0rmIHI£nswIl‘aa1IaEflei'IAp1'i, 2a12am1rnrniiesi1 June, 21112
`(n)I'Ioc.||rd§pwsuIvarq)uI1mguI'1Iyuru=rac:
`(n)r0sganimm.ayneorunyrnoe.snu¢sourenu«neumappncanrenaaemagnnes
`D supprasaaimavniiasehamurmnrnhmrmrurmrim
`F Fewalimnmflfnrs
`FN.Fu0QlIuleal1Ii1|sRellIfIIfl1Isa!BfliI1[IfiDEuldaIn
`NA.N|iIflVBiik
`5 5upqzx>.saa:,ma;nm:nuap«m¢=zms»sranaa:-is
`Xflniafifizfik
`Z varueqeaxauummumnlessumnhznruniulweasmesnxuwn
`What do gnu tmnk of Ouiokfacm?
`Rtrurtz n 5: Paula: mmm mm-, ms Fnmly Uuiifady. rum rhium Inn: PugI1InIin|'1 FsIl'zIIaIn=;:_A:1Iarir:1n rmn-my Ranvey (‘Juneau nlPn(I)hlIm and Hnlnzirg, mm and (‘unruly Hrluailg Hnl r;rm.m=,-a rmmy Raina“ Pnl1|a'I'u7.,Nrrnnal(&!yH'
`§xa|zs|:m,Eunru1rric census, Survey ulfilrsiress uv-mas, Blfirilg PE1li$, Federal Fumis Rqaurl
`Lasl
`'
`Tuesday'.17Jan2D121E:-I2 01 E5!
`
`
`3,531 305,43
`074
`
`
`
`

`
`ATTACHMENT #2
`
`
`
`

`
`so urea Info rn1II:ian
`
`FILE-NAME: MJUSP
`
`GUUERIGE-TYPE: Full-Dexi:
`
`Major US Newspapers
`
`FREQi.lEillCV: Varies by source, see Individual souroe descriptions.
`
`UPDATE-SCHEDULE: Updated regularly - Atypical update schedulefas received from ihe publisher
`CONTENT-SUMMARY:
`
`Access to ceriain freelance articles and other features within ihls publication
`(Le. photographs, classifieds, etc...) may not be available.
`The Major US Newspapers source contains English language newspapers published in i:|1e United States ihat
`are llsird in ihe top 5|} in circulation in Ediinor 81 Publisher Year Book.
`ODHPLETE FILE:
`The Arizona Republic {Phoenix}
`Arkansas Dernocrai:-Gazetba
`The Atlanta Journal-Consi:ltI.ri:ion
`The Baltimore Sun
`The BDSIJMI Globe
`The BDSIIDI1 Herald
`The Buffalo News
`The Charlotte observer
`(2 hicago Sun-Times
`C hlcago Tribune
`The Christian Science Monitor
`The Cincinnali Enquirer (Ohio)
`The Columbus Dispatch
`The Courier-Joumai (Louisville, Kentucky)
`The Daily News Journal, Murfreesbnro, TN
`Daily News {New York}
`The Daily Oklahoman {Oklahoma City, OK)
`The Dallas Morning News
`The Denver PDSII
`Detroit Free Press
`The Deirolt News (Michigan)
`Fort Worth Siar-Telegram
`The Hartford (mutant
`The Houston Chronicle
`The Indianapolis Star (Indiana)
`Journal of Commerce
`The Kansas City Star
`Los Angeies 11mes
`Miami Herald
`The Miiwaukee Journal Sentinel
`The New ‘fork Post
`The New \'iIil'i( Times
`Newsday [New York, NY)
`The Orange County Register
`The Oregonian
`Orlando Sentinel
`The Philadelphia Daily News (FA)
`The Philadelphia Inquirer
`Pitlxburgh Post—Ga zetbe
`The Plain Dealer
`Sacramento Bee
`San Antonio Express-News
`San Diego Union-Tribune
`The San Francisco Chronicle
`The Seaixle ‘limes
`St. Louis Post—Dl5patch
`Star Tribune (Minneapolis MN)
`Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdalal
`
`
`
`

`
`Tampa Bay Tlmes
`The Tampa Trlbune
`Times-Picayune (New Orleans)
`USA Today
`The Washington Post
`
`HIE R- LOC:
`Newslcombined sources
`
`“‘ L€XiSN€XiS
`
`Copyright © 2012 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
`
`
`
`

`
`ATTACHMENT #3
`
`
`
`

`
`IDSBBC
`
`Time of Request: Tuesday, April 17, 2012
`Client ID/Project Name:
`Number of Lines: 2175
`Job Number:
`18232345422616
`
`12:43:50 EST
`
`Research Information
`
`Terms and Connectors Search
`Bervice:
`Print. Request: Selected Documentts}:
`1,3—5,8—12,19.42,44.58,63,63,T8,82,99,100,117,120,130,134,l65,17S,176,l93,208
`Source: Major US Newspapers
`Search Terms: BODY [caps {swedal} and not "Chris sweda”
`
`Send. to:
`
`HABEEB, HYRIAH
`TRADEMARK LA!-I LIBRARY
`600 DULENY ST
`ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314-5790
`
`
`
`

`
`6? LexisNe><is“"
`
`1ocf11IS'TD|IICUIu[EINTS
`
`C 2012 'I‘jmes PL1J:u].1':.h.'ng |2‘.ou:|:pa.n_'r
`J3'.JlR'_i@'d5 Eesenned
`
`Eannpa Ba;_1ZEiancs'
`lalflllflllflv
`Tampa Bay 'I‘1'm2s
`
`P.pcn'l5,2EI12 ']1mIsd:x_'r
`4 Et:2Lte.I':':L11:1u:n:u=asLEu:1.11_1'::cr1
`
`SE[‘.'I'Il]N: LOCAL; IIIN BUSINESS; Pg.-1B
`
`LENGTH: 536 words
`
`]-[E£'I.]]I.IN'E: SCDREJGAGADTST TIIIBAIIIIIII CDDJIPANIES
`
`BYIDIE: RIIIBERT TR_I|Z‘n'3'J.T}E
`
`BODY:
`
`I-In-:1-:23.’ 1crw.I1'n'E:1 _31.:eu1a.1'5 d.crw'nfrmn Bn:um1,h.e1'e to u:11.ee1'o:n 11.15 he have :1 Bosbm Coll ge jnthe Fhzumen Four
`1:u1;2g-'\ocEt'5focL"L‘t1:e NEAR Man's Ice Hn:uu:1-my -zhaucnpiomslmjp atthe Tampa Bay Times Focrum.
`
`We chaiied ‘».Ved11esd:x_'r1:1:a'r1jr1gabcru1t‘rLe team‘: char1:es(goodj._fi.mfl.a.d::ctr1edawoa11BosbJn College Eagles
`cap a.wi,sI:iJl1msu1'e ovt'o1.1r1.=:I'e=a:r.h£r,a1'J.eeu:e1LresL.
`
`‘»H|:1a1.1*:.e is sure of are the legalslap shmshe plans to u:m:1I.iro.1.e firing atthe deep-pocketed makers of cigareues.
`
`iflve senior aflnrney for the Tuba: to L iability Pmje ct, a pcmjeuzt of the 13'|.1]:u].1':: I-Iealh Advocacy Instiime run
`91.11 of Northe a5r.e‘rn TJniw.Iu'sty. He '5 ba1fl.ed the tohacu: cu 1'11.dJ.15I:r_'.rm::cre than 3|] years sinuze ga::b.1a1:ingfrm:r1 kw sI:h::n:u1.
`He‘: awa.I1-:1'ngm.err:nir Ufthe gcnzui fiat aga.1'r:5ta seem.'ng,1_'r irmflmmbh 1'ndu5I:ry.
`
`have is Florida. In2I2IIZIfi,t‘m Fbcriia Supcneme Court. up1*:.e1dT.'|n.e
`]?t'_fim:1a1s_1ma:Lr-zrnajns ‘n Bcu5t.om,]:fi5
`rewrsalof a $1451:u1'JJ.imp1.m.i1:'nr.re dannges vu'd.1'::ta'.=ra1'd.edto wi:1a1wa'e than TIIIEI ,III|J|II a1'J.1'ngF']m'ida srml-:eIs. 1'5
`1-cmzrwn asthe Eagle case.
`
`arui1.Iph21df'nd.1'11gs ‘lhat §r:m:u1-Eng causes d.1'sease,th.atnj::n:I1_im is
`E.11T.h2 same n:crI.1rL ht ncnnl-:va1's 9.1.2
`=2uidicIive,that u:iga.1'e11es are defectinre mi da11ga'o1.15,a1v:111uttoba::co u:n:u1J:o;nm.i.es1*:.1'::1t‘ne heahh effects of sncuzul-:i:1g.
`
`
`
`

`
`SCORING J’-\G:’\l.NS'l' ‘l'OBJ'\CCO COMPANIES Tzlmpa Ba)? '1'il'nc3 April 5, 3012 'l'hu.rsd:iy
`
`Page 2
`
`Since then, 1-‘lorida's become home to thousands of lawsuits by smokers against tobacco companies.
`
`So far, says Swedg. lhc tobacco industry is losing about two ol‘cvcrg.' thrcc lawsuits decided. Many ycarsof‘
`litigation still lie ahead
`
`Tlic U.S. Suprumc CoLu'T. rcinlbrccd llial fnrcczlsl last wccli. The coLLrT. TEll.L‘9I:d to hear an appeal by R..l. Rc}'!‘iulr.l:$
`Tobacco Co. in 3 Pensacola casc in wl1icl'i it was ordered in pay $23.3 million to Mathilde l\«'l:1r1.in. Her husband. Bonny.
`died in 1995 of lung cancer after decades of smoking the company's Lucky Strike brand.
`
`‘Tobacco com panies face the prospect ofhaving to pay billions of dollars in liability to Florida smokers afier the
`U.S. Supreme Coun decision,” Swcda says.
`
`Still, lhc biggsr battlc ovcr tolnacon is not in Lhc coLLrts but in scicicly. Syfigfla points to Ihi: stil]—1oo-high nLu'nb::r of
`young punplc bclwucn l3 and l3 who stafl smoking l'lCC:«1LL{c il rclains a ccflain cool laclnr.
`
`How do you Eig_l1ll}tal'!
`
`Keep raising Llii: already uxpcnsivc price on cigarctlcs.
`
`Kccp sl'iowiJ1g up at sharcholdcr rncclirgs to prussuru: lobaoco cxccutivcs about .-socii:1}-"s costs from smoking.
`
`Keep pushing to ban smoking, as soum: communities arc, from building exteriors, campuses, parks and licaclu-3, and
`even in condos based on the argument that smoke can be smelled through shared walls.
`
`Keep pushing to limit the marketing of cigarettes Keep pressing for even more stanlingly graphic warnings labels
`on tobacco packaging.
`
`And, Sweda says, kucp pushing in [he courLa for big verdicts and belly LlEI.i'|‘l':'lg|.‘.R.
`
`In the end. he says. it's all about malring tobacco companies bear the legal and financial responsibility for harm
`caused by pcopli: using their products.
`
`Tobacco companies have been ordered to pay more than $375 million in 60 of the cases arising from the Engle
`case. Trial dates have been set for 7'5 more suits for this year.
`
`There's 2 legal lesson in hockey. Shoot often and hard. and sometimes you score.
`
`Contact Robert Trigaux at trigaux@tam pabaycom
`
`LOAD~DATl£: April 5, 21012
`
`
`
`

`
`OE LexisNexis”
`
`3 ocf11IS'TD|IICTUIulIEINTS
`
`Eiuzrpj-'rig1:112|I|12 |?h.1'::ago ']1'.'b1.1ne |'.'m:r:q:uart_'.-'
`J3'.JlR'_i@'ds Reserved
`|Zh.1'::ago 'l1'.'b‘I.me
`
`March 14,2012 ‘mam sclay
`|Zl1.i.cagI:nh.r1I:1F‘inalEI:l.iI.i.or1
`
`SEl'.‘.'I'Il]N: BUSl1~TESS,'ZIZI1~TE I2 {TYPE} Dea1h Nu:I1.iu:e,'Pg.S
`
`LENGTH: 232 words
`
`]'[EH.]]IJI'TE2 Dee1l1Nuti:e:RJ:beL1D.Fou'en:a1:1
`
`BIJIJY:
`
`Robert D. Fireman, T9 , a 1'E51.liEl!'|l'. ocf |31'erui Haven in Rmnen:rw'JJ.e , IL,pessed awaype as efulljr um Mar-:h l|II , 2|] 12
`at Naples |3on:n:roJr1jt_vHo$i1al,l~Taphs,FL. He was been Elct. 2?, 1932 in |Z1Li::ago,l1.. Bob is slnelieredhyhjs devoted
`wife of 55 ye ars, Jnzuan (nee Jarzabj; his loving u:l*:.1'.‘I:11'en, Diarme (Ka.1'l)l3'n:u1as1-:in:u1' Berlcelejr, IL , Robert D. (Derdse)
`Fbcreman Ir. of l~Taples,FI. and Kevin (K1-'5) Focremanocf IJmaha,l~TE;h.1's c11e1-jshedg-and::hfl.drer1,I§rkLir1(P.lexj Rigg,
`Da'.=:I'nPo1asl-:i,I'Eellj.r(|1trisj 'l1'epp,B1'jtten_','FoIen:en,.Terma e.1:viE11'sa Ftcrema:n,'h.1's b1'crLh.er,.Tames (P.1'lenej Fb1'ema11,'
`his s1'J:ul1'ngs-in-hw,Hehn(1he late Raj-'J:r:|JJtr1J:1.j'I.".i'i:IjLI:r'.=t'iJ:z,.n!3'uJ.'iJ:e (Fred) Rosen::rw,Hem'ie11a (l~Tm:ma.1:1j,'fi1.§m.;_es well as
`ma1t_vn.‘e:es aaruinephews He was p1'eu:enied1'n u:1em‘l1hyhispeIerds,Ja.u:es awi Iiatherine Foreman eruipererds-i:1-law,
`Rrnse a.nc1‘»F.FaJI.er .TaI2‘:ah,'11.1's sflnljngs-in-1aw,Do1-ot1t_-.r (the late .Ten:r_-.rj Sevcll-:,E'.dw'i1:1(the late He1er1j.Ta1'n‘ah, Sylvia
`Dolecl-:i
`
`Bobpcwlsdlysenredintlxe USJ3..1:r:r1_'.rn:1J.1I'11gt11e Kuzcrean |3nmt'lJ'::1_
`
`He was al::nr.I'inglo.1sbe1*ui,fe1h.er a1:vigre.1m:1I'a1he1'e1*uilL"s 1-:iruiheaItw'jJlbe n:1eepl_'rm:'ssed.
`
`Fbrthuznse who w1:ruJ.I:1l.11-;e 11:: leave a lasting tri:n.1I.e to Bob's life ,n:em.o1‘iaJsmaybe made T.IZITJ:'I.E P.me1'ica.n l3'a1i-;1'nsI:u11
`Disease Assoc
`
`V1'sta1:im1 H'flay,l!uIa1'-:11 16,3 T.u:u§| pm. atthe Iilvecman-Jorxes Emenl Home & |31'ema1:im:1 SeIT.".i.CE5,IZI20:|:'I.E1' ocf
`RcrI.11r.es3|J arui5§I,l3‘1ajm'ieli.
`
`Tne Mass of |Zlu1sLianBI.11'ialw'jJlbe u:e lebcrated on Sm.11'c1aj.«',l!uE.1'cl11'I,l|II:3|II am. at St Mary hznmaxuhte |2‘aT.holJ'::
`I21*o.1I-:11, 15629 S.Rm.tr.e 59,P1a.1'r1f1'el::1.
`
`lvzamzcrs wfllfolhw at Re sI.11:rev:Lim:1 |3em.e1eI_'.r, .TI.1sr.i::e.
`
`Fbcr 1'11fu S15-436-9221 m'www.ov\ern:an-jocnes.cm:u Sigu |}I.1.esLbcu:«l-c at-:11j::ag\:I'tL'il:rI.1ne.mu:n.I'ol:ui11Ja1'i.es
`
`
`
`

`
`Death Notice: Robert D. Foreman Chi-zzlgc-'l‘ribI.u'1c March 14. 2012 Wednesday
`
`Page 4
`
`unwa-
`
`'['his is :1 paid death notice.
`
`LOAD—DA‘l'l:I: March I-1, 3012
`
`
`
`

`
`fig LexisNe><is“"
`
`-1- ocf11IS'TD|IICUIulENTS
`
`C 2012 'I‘jmes PL1J:u].1':.h.'ng |2‘.ou:|:pa.n_'r
`J3'.JlR'_i@'d5 Eesenned
`
`Eannpa Bag._1ECi1ncs'
`lalflllflllflv
`Tampa Bay 'I‘1'm2s
`
`Iu!Ea:ch13,2EI12 'I'I.1.esd:aL_'r
`III So‘I.tfl:1 Pjnellas Eu:1.1'I.'im
`
`sncnun: LIZII2P.L,'13'g. 13
`
`LENGTH: 431 words
`
`]'[E1U]IJI'TE2 WIFE USES CPR TIII SJ3fiI"E HLTSBP.1~TD'S LIF'E- A|Z'n°.J1~T
`
`BYIDIE: P.1~TJ3IRIE'nVIu.u[E£3.|II-1£3.IuI,TIb.uIES STP.F'F‘nF.i'R_I'I'ER
`
`]h'LTEIJI'i|'E: ST. PE'I'ERSB'LTRJZ‘r
`
`BODY:
`
`Barbara %1-crmw sm:n.e'r.hjr1g was wrong w'j1hha'hJ.15ha.1:vi Sarrdaymzazrjrxg.
`
`I2'nu'aJ:i mam, I59 ,hadjusr.1'e1J.1111ed to their I: 31' fmcm '5 Sa:IJ.11'c1ay1:r1:a1'1-:eT..
`
`']1um11e warn. sfl.erd,wo‘u1:1r1'ta115'.=r€rhj5wfe's quemms mi sta:Ledbcrefll1.1'11groug,’n1_'r.
`
`Aretiredmirse who hadwuuicedm u:ocmcmI_'r caI\e,BaIharafl.|.gm,IS3,1-cmwslme had].1'1:rJ.e them to 31:1.
`
`HE]? hnbuviwashatixg a hea.1'L a11ad-:.
`
`Tnis wamt five firsttirre she hadseenthat 1001-: 1'nhe1' hJ.15bmi's 1'a::e .
`
`Etna e~r.ren.1'ng1'n2EIIZI5,Gemmhteflashmmedmflmflnmfifimtcmfinashjswfe u:1ea11edupfro1ndi1*a:m'.
`
`She gatrelmin |ZP1?..I-Ie1.=:I'o1-:e1J;u1Jefu:tL'e11e];uaJ1'iw.reui.I-Ie lived.
`
`Ncrw itwas happening again.