`
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`93
`
`In the Matter ofAp lication Serial No. 76/280,484
`Published in the Oficial Gazette on March 18, 2003 at TM 546
`
`Trademark: FEMALEV
`
`
`Bayer-Roche L.L.C.,
`Opposition No. 91 156838
`
`
`
`v.
`
`Jude LaCour,
`
`Opposer
`
`Applicant.
`
`»
`OPPOSER’S ANSWER TO
`COUNTERCLAIMS
`
`Box TTAB NO FEE
`Commissioner for Trademarks
`2900 Crystal Drive
`Arlington, Virginia 22202-3514
`
`OPPOSER’S ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIMS
`
`Opposer Bayer-Roche L.L.C. (“Opposer”) replies to the Counterclaims filed by
`
`Applicant Jude LaCour (“Applicant”) as follows:
`1.
`As to paragraph 17 of the Counterclaims, Opposer admits that Applicant
`
`has alleged counterclaims for cancellation of the registration of Opposer’s ALEVE mark.
`
`Except as expressly admitted herein, Opposer denies the allegations in paragraph 17 of
`
`the Counterclaims.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Opposer admits the allegations in paragraph 18 of the Counterclaims.
`
`As to paragraph 19 of the Counterclaims, Opposer admits that it is the
`
`owner of U.S. Registration No. 1,536,042 in international class 5 for the mark ALEVE
`
`
`
`
`
`for “anti-inflammatory, analgesic, and antipyretic pharmaceutical preparations.” Except
`
`as expressly admitted herein, Opposer denies the allegations in paragraph 19 of the
`
`? £3
`
`Counterclaims.
`
`4.
`
`As to paragraph 20 of the Counterclaims, Opposer admits that it sells goods
`
`under the ALEVE mark that contain the active ingredient naproxen sodium. Except as
`
`expressly admitted herein, Opposer denies the allegations in paragraph 20 of the
`
`Counterclaims.
`
`5.
`
`In response to paragraph 21 of the Counterclaims, Opposer repeats and
`
`incorporates by reference its answers to paragraphs 17 through 20 as though fully set
`
`forth herein.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`Opposer denies thelallegations in paragraph 22 of the Counterclaims.
`
`In response to paragraph 23 of the Counterclaims, Opposer repeats and
`
`incorporates by reference its answers to paragraphs 17 through 22 as though fully set
`
`forth herein.
`
`8.
`
`Opposer denies the allegations in paragraph 24 of the Counterclaims.
`
`AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
`
`1.
`
`Applicant’s Counterclaims are barred because Opposer’s ALEVE mark is
`
`not, and has never been, generic.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`Applicant’s Counterclaims are barred by the doctrine of laches.
`
`Applicant’s Counterclaims are barred by the doctrine of estoppel.
`
`Applicant’s Counterclaims are barred by the doctrine of acquiescence.
`
`
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`Applicant’s Counterclaims are barred by the doctrine of waiver.
`
`App1icant’s Counterclaims are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`HELLER EHRMAN WHITE & MCAULIFFE LLP
`
`Dated: September 25, 2003
`
`By:
`
`Beth M. Goldman
`
`Todd E. Adler
`
`333 Bush Street
`
`San Francisco, CA 94104-2878
`
`(415) 772-6000
`
`Attorneys for Bayer-Roche L.L.C.
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`“‘\‘”\‘éN}>
`
`Iiiiithe Matter of Ap lication Serial No. 76/280,484
`P_I_1;blished in the Oficial Gazette on March 18, 2003 at TM 546
`Trademark: FEMALEV
`
`
`
`Bayer-Roche L.L.C.,
`Opposition No. 91156838
`
`Opposer
`
`v.
`
`
`
`OPPOSER’S ANSWER TO
`COUNTERCLAIMS
`
`JudeLaCour,
`
`
`
`Applicant.
`
`Box TTAB NO FEE
`Commissioner for Trademarks
`2900 Crystal Drive
`Arlington, Virginia 22202-3514
`
`Dear Sir/Madam:
`
`TRANSMITTAL LETTER
`
`/
`
`————-— ~ -~ -
`I|||ll|||||||||||lllll||||l|||||||||||||||||||l|||
`
`-
`
`O9-29-2003
`
`u.s. P|unt& TMO1cITM Mull Rent or #22
`
`We are attorneys representing Opposer Bayer-Roche L.L.C. Enclosed is an original
`OPPOSER’S ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIMS filed by Bayer-Roche L.L.C.
`
`Please address all correspondence to me at the address below. Please stamp the enclosed
`postcard to evidence your receipt of this document.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`HELLER EHRMAN WHITE & MCAULIFFE LLP
`
`Dated: September 25, 2003
`
`By:
`
`Beth M. Goldman
`
`Todd E. Adler
`
`333 Bush Street
`
`San Francisco, CA 94104-2878
`
`(415) 772-6000
`
`Attorneys for Bayer-Roche L.L.C.
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
