Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`ESTTA839534
`
`Filing date:
`
`08/14/2017
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Proceeding
`
`91235423
`
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`
`Filer's Name
`
`Filer's email
`
`Signature
`
`Date
`
`Defendant
`Lindsay Hall
`
`CHRISTINA SCALERA
`19 HOLCOMB BRIDGE ROAD
`NORCROSS, GA 30071
`Email: hello@christinascalera.com, christina.scalera@live.com,
`christina@christinascalera.com
`
`Answer
`
`Christina Scalera
`
`christina@scaleralaw.com, joe@scaleralaw.com
`
`/christina scalera/
`
`08/14/2017
`
`Attachments
`
`BK Answer.pdf(85496 bytes )
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`In the Matter of Serial No. 87126494
`Mark: BEE’S KNEES LOFT
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`____________________________________)
`
`
`ANNCO., INC.
`
`Opposer,
`
`vs.
`
`LINDSAY HALL
`
`Applicant.
`
`Opposition No. 91235423
`
`
`
`ANSWER TO NOTICE OF OPPOSITION
`
`Applicant, Lindsay Hall, (“Applicant” or “Ms. Hall”) hereby replies to the numbered
`
`grounds for opposition set forth in Opposer’s Notice of Opposition as follows:
`
`1. Applicant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations in Paragraph 1 and therefore denies those allegations.
`
`2. Applicant denies that Opposer, together with its related entities, is a leading national
`
`speciality retailer of women’s apparel, shoes, accessories, and related goods and services.
`
`For all other allegations contained in Paragraph 2, Applicant lacks knowledge or
`
`information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore
`
`denies those allegations.
`
`3. Applicant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations in Paragraph 3 and therefore denies those allegations.
`
`
`
`4. Applicant denies that Opposer has evolved into a nationally famous brand for women’s
`
`attire. For all other allegations contained in Paragraph 4, Applicant lacks knowledge or
`
`information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore
`
`denies those allegations.
`
`5. Applicant denies that Opposer has developed enormous goodwill in the “LOFT” mark.
`
`For all other allegations contained in Paragraph 5, Applicant lacks knowledge or
`
`information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore
`
`denies those allegations.
`
`6. Denied.
`
`7. Applicant denies that Opposer’s marks are valid, subsisting and are in full force and
`
`effect, and constitute evidence of the validity of the “LOFT” mark and of Opposer’s
`
`exclusive right to use the “LOFT” mark for the goods and services identified in its
`
`registrations. For all other allegations contained in Paragraph 7, Applicant lacks
`
`knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`therefore denies those allegations.
`
`8. Admitted.
`
`9. Admitted.
`
`10. Admitted.
`
`11. To the extent that Paragraph 11 insinuates that Applicant needs permission or
`
`authorization from Opposer to use Applicant’s Mark, Applicant denies such allegations.
`
`For all other allegations contained in Paragraph 11, Applicant lacks knowledge or
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore
`
`denies those allegations.
`
`12. Applicant denies having any notice of any rights allegedly held by Opposer in and to the
`
`“LOFT” mark. For all other allegations contained in Paragraph 12, Applicant lacks
`
`knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and
`
`therefore denies those allegations.
`
`13. Denied.
`
`14. Applicant reasserts her answers to Paragraphs 1 through 13 above.
`
`15. Applicant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations in Paragraph 15 and therefore denies those allegations.
`
`16. Denied.
`
`17. Applicant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations in Paragraph 17 and therefore denies those allegations.
`
`18. Denied.
`
`19. Denied.
`
`20. Applicant reasserts her answers to Paragraphs 1 through 19 above.
`
`21. Applicant denies that Opposer’s “LOFT” mark is distinctive and famous or that it is
`
`widely recognized by consumers as a symbol of Opposer and its goods and services. For
`
`all other allegations contained in Paragraph 21, Applicant lacks knowledge or
`
`information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore
`
`denies those allegations.
`
`22. Denied.
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`23. Denied.
`
`24. Denied.
`
`
`
`AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
`
`Applicant asserts that the following affirmative defenses bar Opposer’s requested relief in
`
`its Notice of Opposition.
`
`FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`One or more of Opposer’s claims are barred by the equitable defenses of laches,
`
`acquiescence, waiver, or estoppel.
`
`SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`One or more of Opposer’s claims fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
`
`THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`Applicant hereby gives notice that it may rely on any other defenses that may become
`
`available or appear proper before, or during, discovery, and hereby reserves its right to amend
`
`this Answer to assert any such defenses.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`WHEREFORE, Applicant requests that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board dismiss
`
`the Notice of Opposition and grant all other appropriate relief to Applicant as it deems just and
`
`fair.
`
`Respectfully submitted this 14th day of August, 2017.
`
`By:
`
`
`
` /Christina Scalera/ _
`
`Christina Scalera, Esq.
`Georgia Bar No. 201713
`Christina@scaleralaw.com
`Joseph Staley, Esq.
`Georgia Bar No. 142571
`Joe@scaleralaw.com
`
`
`Scalera Law LLC
`10 Holcomb Bridge Road
`Atlanta, Georgia 30071
`Telephone: (404) 721-1143
`
`Attorneys for Applicant
`Lindsay Hall
`
`
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF ELECTRONIC FILING AND SERVICE
`
` hereby certify that the foregoing CONSENT MOTION TO SUSPEND OPPOSITION
`
` I
`
`PROCEEDINGS is being submitted to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board via electronic
`
`means by filing with the Electronic Systems for Trademark Trial and Appeals on August 14,
`
`2017. A true and correct copy was also emailed to Opposer’s attorney:
`
`Laura Popp-Rosenberg
`Fross Zelnick Lerhman & Zissu, P.C.
`4 Times Square, 17th Floor
`New York, NY 10036
`lpopp-rosenberg@fzlz.com
`(212) 813-5900
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /Christina Scalera/ _
`Christina Scalera, Esq.
`
`- 6 -
`
`
