Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`ESTTA758639
`
`Filing date:
`
`07/15/2016
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Proceeding
`
`91214673
`
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`
`Filer's Name
`
`Filer's e-mail
`
`Signature
`
`Date
`
`Plaintiff
`Edge Games, Inc.
`
`TIM LANGDELL
`EDGE GAMES INC
`530 SOUTH LAKE AVENUE, SUITE 171
`PASADENA, CA 91101
`UNITED STATES
`uspto@edgegames.com, tim@edgegames.com
`
`Other Motions/Papers
`
`Tim Langdell
`
`uspto@edgegames.com, tim@edgegames.com
`
`/Tim Langdell/
`
`07/15/2016
`
`Attachments
`
`AmendedRedacted2004CTAForOpenFiling.pdf(685028 bytes )
`
`

`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Cancellation No. 92062034
`Opposition No. 91214673
`
`
`Mark: EDGE
`
`
`}
`
`
`EDGE GAMES, INC.
`}
`
`
`
`
`
`
`}
`
`
`Opposer, Petitioner
`}
`
`
`
`
`
`
`}
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`}
`
`
`
`
`
`
`}
`
`FUTURE PUBLISHING LTD.,
`}
`
`
`
`
`
`
`}
`
`
`Applicant, Respondent
`}
`
`
`
`
`
`
`____________________________________}
`
`
`
`
`
`RESPONSE TO BOARD ORDER DATED 7/14/16 AND
`AMENDED REDACTED COPY OF CONFIDENTIAL
`DOCUMENT(S) FILED AT DOCKET #59 of 91214673
`AND AT DOCKET #14 of 92062034
`
`
`
`In its Order of July 14, 2016, the Board stated that Opposer/Petitioner may not fully
`redact a confidential document filed and designated as confidential and trade secret.
`Respectfully, redaction of the document is appropriate in this instance since the entire document
`is a confidential trade secret agreement. As the Board can see from the confidential copy of the
`document filed under seal, paragraph 6.8 (a) of the agreement specifically states that the parties
`are to keep strictly confidential all information relating to the "provisions or subject matter" of
`the Concurrent Trading Agreement and Deed. Since every page other than the title page of the
`document contains information relating to the provisions of the agreement or its subject matter, it
`follows that the parties agreed to keep strictly confidential the entire agreement. On advice
`received, Opposer/Petitioner attaches a revised redacted version of the document(s), this time
`with the cover sheet visible (being the only part of the document that per its confidentiality
`clause is not to be restricted from public view). This document(s) is filed indicated as
`confidential and trade secret per the Board's standard protective order in accord with Trademark
`Rule 2.126(c), TBMP 120.02 & 412.04.
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`
`Further and in support of Opposer/Petitioner's position that full redaction of the main
`document is proper, Opposer/Petitioner refers to TBMP 412.04. This section deals with the filing
`of confidential materials, and gives guidance as to how they should be redacted. In particular,
`Opposer/Petitioner draws the Board's attention to the excerpt from the Board's Standard
`Protective Order given at the foot of this section of the TBMP (Paragraph 12 of the Order), in
`pertinent part:
`
`12) Redaction; Filing Material with Board
`
`"... if most of the material on the page is confidential, then filing the entire
`page under seal would be more reasonable, even if some small quantity of
`nonconfidential material is then withheld from the public record. ... if almost
`every page of the document contains some confidential material, it may be
`more reasonable to simply submit the entire document under seal" (our
`emphasis).
`
`Here it seems clear that the Board intends that where appropriate either an entire page
`that "mostly" contains confidential material, or an entire document that contains mostly
`confidential material, the document should both be filed under seal with the entire page or the
`entire document thus being not visible to the public. This is the only logical interpretation of the
`Board's protective order as cited above, since otherwise if having filed an "entire page" under
`seal the party was then still required to file publicly the same page with parts of it left
`unredacted, then the Board would not have stated "even if some small quantity of nonconfidential
`material is then withheld from the public record."
`
`It is thus Opposer/Petitioner's understanding that where a document is largely
`confidential, then the entirety of the document is acceptable to be filed under seal, which -- by
`reference to the Board's own Standard Protection Order guidelines -- means that no part of that
`document which is "under seal" is then made visible to the public.
`
`This agrees with Opposer/Petitioner's experience of matters before the Board: in other
`instances where a party has filed a document designated as confidential and trade secret, then the
`entire document is under seal, and it is entirely redacted in the public record filing version. Usual
`practice in the other cases before the Board has been that often such a document is exhibited to a
`declaration, and in the publicly viewable version of the declaration that exhibit merely has a
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`cover sheet stating that its contents are filed under seal (and there is then nothing at all in that
`exhibit on the public view -- not even a fully redacted document).
`
`Indeed, this particular document in question has been entered into evidence in other
`matters before the Board, and in each instance it has been marked as confidential and trade
`secret, and where filed under seal it would have been fully redacted in the public view.
`Opposer/Petitioner has been very diligent since 2004 to always designate the document as
`confidential and never permit it to be publicly viewable. And in all cases the document has been
`fully redacted (or, more usually, simply not present in the public version of the filing in
`question).
`
`Respondent has suggested inter alia that the document has already been made public
`elsewhere: but this is not true. While the document has been entered into evidence in proceedings
`in the UK Courts, the documents and all evidence in those cases are not publicly viewable.
`Hence this document while exhibited in such UK proceedings was never viewable by the public.
`To the best of Opposer/Petitioner's knowledge, at all times since 2004 the Agreement in question
`has been carefully, and correctly, sealed from public view.
`
`Opposer/Petitioner thus submits that it believes the attached publicly viewable redacted
`copy meets the Board's rules and orders and the guidelines for redaction in TMBP 412.04.
`
`Last, attached is a copy of the Proof of Service on Respondent of the document(s) filed
`under seal on July 7, 2016, and Opposer/Petitioner apologizes for not attaching same to its prior
`filing.
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted:
`
`/s/ Tim Langdell___________
`Dr Tim Langdell
`CEO, Edge Games Inc
`Opposer/Petitioner in Pro Se
`530 South Lake Avenue 171
`Pasadena, CA 91101
`Tel: 626 824 0097
`Fax: 626 844 4EDGE (844 4334)
`Email: tim@edgegames.com
`
`By:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: July 15, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`I hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing RESPONSE TO BOARD ORDER DATED
`7/14/16 AND AMENDED REDACTED COPY OF CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENT(S) FILED
`AT DOCKET #59 of 91214673 AND AT DOCKET #14 of 92062034 was served on Applicant
`via First Class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid on July 15, 2016
`
`
`Robert N Phillips
`Reed Smith LLP
`101 Second Street
`Suite 1800
`San Francisco
`CA 94105
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/Tim Langdell___________
` Tim Langdell
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`I hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing DOCUMENT(S) FILED AS CONFIDENTIAL
`UNDER SEAL OF THE BOARD'S STANDARD PROTECTION ORDER ON JULY 7, 2016
`was served on Applicant via First Class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid on July 7, 2016
`
`
`Robert N Phillips
`Reed Smith LLP
`101 Second Street
`Suite 1800
`San Francisco
`CA 94105
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/Tim Langdell___________
` Tim Langdell
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`0C3I7)I°—9~(
`
`IS/J 3”‘
`
`THE EDGE INTERACTIVE MEDIA. INE.
`
`.3-mg]-
`
`FUTURE PUBLISHING LIMITED
`
`GUN CURRENT TRADING AGREEMENT
`AND
`
`DEED DF TRADEILIARK ASSIGNMENT