Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`ESTTA889506
`04/12/2018
`
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`Filing date:
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Notice of Opposition
`
`Notice is hereby given that the following party opposes registration of the indicated application.
`
`Opposer Information
`
`Name
`
`Entity
`
`Address
`
`Attorney informa-
`tion
`
`MiMedx Group, Inc.
`
`Corporation
`
`Citizenship
`
`Florida
`
`1775 West Oak Common Ct.
`Marietta, GA 30062
`UNITED STATES
`
`Marcy L. Sperry
`Sperry IP Law LLC
`3455 Peachtree Rd. NE
`5th Floor
`Atlanta, GA 30326
`UNITED STATES
`Email: alex@sperryiplaw.com, docketing@sperryiplaw.com,
`marlie@sperryiplaw.com
`Phone: 404-474-1600
`
`Applicant Information
`
`Application No
`
`87546839
`
`Publication date
`
`03/13/2018
`
`Opposition Filing
`Date
`
`Applicant
`
`04/12/2018
`
`Opposition Peri-
`od Ends
`
`04/12/2018
`
`Team SLX Holdings, LLC
`Bldg 400, Suite 307
`11503 NW Military Hwy
`San Antonio, TX 78231
`UNITED STATES
`
`Goods/Services Affected by Opposition
`
`Class 005. First Use: 2014/05/05 First Use In Commerce: 2014/05/05
`All goods and services in the class are opposed, namely: Human allograft tissue, namely liquid amni-
`otic fluid allograft
`
`Grounds for Opposition
`
`Priority and likelihood of confusion
`
`Trademark Act Section 2(d)
`
`Fraud on the USPTO
`
`In re Bose Corp., 580 F.3d 1240, 91 USPQ2d
`1938 (Fed. Cir. 2009)
`
`Marks Cited by Opposer as Basis for Opposition
`
`U.S. Registration
`No.
`
`5407621
`
`Registration Date
`
`02/20/2018
`
`Application Date
`
`08/23/2017
`
`Foreign Priority
`Date
`
`NONE
`
`

`

`Word Mark
`
`Design Mark
`
`AMNIOFIX
`
`Description of
`Mark
`
`Goods/Services
`
`NONE
`
`Class 005. First use: First Use: 2011/09/30 First Use In Commerce: 2011/09/30
`biologic drugs for treating inflammation and pain using regenerative tissue com-
`ponents
`
`U.S. Registration
`No.
`
`5380224
`
`Registration Date
`
`01/16/2018
`
`Word Mark
`
`Design Mark
`
`AMNIOFIX
`
`Application Date
`
`06/23/2017
`
`Foreign Priority
`Date
`
`NONE
`
`Description of
`Mark
`
`Goods/Services
`
`NONE
`
`Class 005. First use: First Use: 2011/01/05 First Use In Commerce: 2011/01/05
`Human biological amniotic membrane tissue intended for subsequent implanta-
`tion
`
`U.S. Registration
`No.
`
`4017234
`
`Registration Date
`
`08/23/2011
`
`Word Mark
`
`AMNIOFIX
`
`Application Date
`
`12/13/2010
`
`Foreign Priority
`Date
`
`NONE
`
`

`

`Design Mark
`
`Description of
`Mark
`
`Goods/Services
`
`Attachments
`
`NONE
`
`Class 005. First use: First Use: 2011/01/05 First Use In Commerce: 2011/01/05
`Implantable tissue derived from human amniotic fluid cells
`
`87580508#TMSN.png( bytes )
`87502991#TMSN.png( bytes )
`85196194#TMSN.png( bytes )
`Notice of Opp re AMNIOFLEX.pdf(252390 bytes )
`Exhibits A-H.pdf(5262336 bytes )
`
`Signature
`
`/Marcy L. Sperry/
`
`Name
`
`Date
`
`Marcy L. Sperry
`
`04/12/2018
`
`

`

`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`MIMEDX GROUP, INC.,
`
`Opposer,
`
`
`v.
`
`TEAM SLX HOLDINGS, LLC,
`Applicant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mark: AMNIOFLEX
`U.S. Application Serial No. 87/546,839
`
`
`
`NOTICE FOR OPPOSITION
`
`Opposer, MiMedx Group, Inc. (“Opposer”), a Florida corporation with its principal place
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`of business at 1775 West Oak Commons Ct., Marietta, Georgia, 30062, believes that it will be
`
`damaged by registration of the mark AMNIOFLEX (the “AMNIOFLEX Mark”), which is the
`
`subject of U.S. Application Serial No. 87/546,839 (the “AMNIOFLEX Application”) filed by
`
`Team SLX Holdings, LLC (“Applicant”), and therefore opposes this application based on the
`
`following grounds:
`
`1. Opposer is the global leader in the processing, marketing, distribution, and sale of
`
`human amniotic tissue for numerous medical therapeutic areas.
`
`2. Opposer is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to the AMNIOFIX mark in
`
`connection with amniotic tissue products, biologic drugs, and related products.
`
`3. Opposer owns the following U.S. federal trademark registrations for the AMNIOFIX
`
`mark:
`
`
`
`a. AMNIOFIX, U.S. Registration No. 4,017,234 (the “’234 Registration”),
`
`registered on August 23, 2011 and based on a first use date of January 5,
`
`1
`
`

`

`2011, for “implantable tissue derived from human amniotic fluid cells” in
`
`International Class 5;
`
`b. AMNIOFIX, U.S. Registration No. 5,380,224 (the ‘224 Registration”)
`
`registered on January 18, 2018 and based on a first use date of January 5,
`
`2011, for “human biological amniotic membrane tissue intended for
`
`subsequent implantation” in International Class 5; and
`
`c. AMNIOFIX, U.S. Registration No. 5,407,621, registered on February 20,
`
`2018 and based on a first use date of August 30, 2011, for “biologic drugs
`
`for treating inflammation and pain using regenerative tissue components”
`
`in International Class 5.
`
`4. Collectively, the trademarks described in the above registrations are referred to herein
`
`as the “AMNIOFIX Registrations” for the “AMNIOFIX Mark” (or the “Mark”) and the goods for
`
`the above registrations will be referred to herein as “Opposer’s Goods.” True and accurate copies
`
`of the registration certificates for the AMNIOFIX Registrations are attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`
`5. The AMNIOFIX Registrations are valid, subsisting, and serve as prima facie evidence
`
`of the validity of the AMNIOFIX Mark and of Opposer’s exclusive right to use the AMNIOFIX
`
`Mark in connection with the Opposer’s Goods, pursuant to Section 33(a) of the Lanham Act, 15
`
`U.S.C. § 1115(a).
`
`6. Opposer established rights in and to the AMNIOFIX Mark through its continuous and
`
`exclusive use of the AMNIOFIX Mark in interstate commerce since at least as early as 2011 in
`
`connection with Opposer’s Goods.
`
`7. Opposer has extensively promoted and sold Opposer’s Goods under the AMNIOFIX
`
`Mark in the medical field. Through the widespread promotion and continuous use of the
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`AMNIOFIX Mark, Opposer has built a substantial amount of goodwill in the AMNIOFIX Mark
`
`in connection with Opposer’s Goods. Therefore, consumers readily recognize the AMNIOFIX
`
`Mark as a source identifier for Opposer’s Goods in the medical industry.
`
`8. Upon information and belief, Applicant is a Texas limited liability company with its
`
`principal place of business located at 11503 NW Military Hwy, Building 400, Suite 307, San
`
`Antonio, Texas, 78231.
`
`9. Upon information and belief, Applicant sells its products through an affiliated
`
`company called SurgiLogix, LLC (“SurgiLogix”), a Texas limited liability company with its
`
`principal place of business located at 11503 NW Military Hwy, Building 400, Suite 307, San
`
`Antonio, Texas, 78231, which is the same principal place of business as the Applicant. A true and
`
`accurate screenshot of the Texas Secretary of State’s corporate record for SurgiLogix is attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit B.
`
`10. Upon information and belief, Applicant and SurgiLogix are closely or highly affiliated
`
`entities with at least two common members/managers, including Mr. James Pruski and Mr. Tom
`
`Abel.
`
`11. On May 27, 2017, Opposer’s counsel sent a demand letter (the “Demand Letter”) to
`
`Mr. Jay Pruski, C.E.O. of SurgiLogix, requesting that SurgiLogix cease and desist from any and
`
`all use of the AMNIOFLEX Mark based on a likelihood of confusion with the Opposer’s
`
`AMNIOFIX Mark. A true and accurate copy of the Demand Letter is attached hereto as Exhibit
`
`C.
`
`12. On June 21, 2017, SurgiLogix’s counsel, Ms. Katherine Walters, sent a response (the
`
`“Response”) to the Demand Letter refusing to cease use of the AMNIOFLEX Mark. A true and
`
`accurate copy of the Response is attached hereto as Exhibit D.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`13. On July 13, 2017, Opposer’s counsel sent a reply (the “Reply”) to the Response again
`
`requesting that SurgiLogix cease and desist from continued use of the AMNIOFLEX Mark. A
`
`true and accurate copy of the Reply is attached hereto as Exhibit E.
`
`14. On July 28, 2017, Applicant, also represented by SurgiLogix’s counsel Ms. Katherine
`
`Walters, filed the AMNIOFLEX Application for the AMNIOFLEX Mark listing Team SLX
`
`Holdings LLC as the owner of the mark. The AMNIOFLEX Application covers “human allograft
`
`tissue, namely liquid amniotic fluid allograft” in International Class 5 (the “Applicant’s Goods”).
`
`The AMNIOFLEX Application for the Applicant’s Goods purports a first use anywhere and first
`
`use in commerce date of May 5, 2014 (“Applicant’s Alleged First Use Date”).
`
`15. In the AMNIOFLEX Application, Applicant submitted a specimen (the “Specimen”)
`
`consisting of a screenshot of a website operated by SurgiLogix displaying the AMNIOFLEX mark.
`
`A true and accurate copy of the AMNIOFLEX Application containing the Specimen is attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit F.
`
`16. On October 30, 2017, the Examining Attorney assigned to examine the AMNIOFLEX
`
`Application issued an Office Action refusing the Specimen because it contained mere advertising
`
`material and failed to show use of the AMNIOFLEX Mark in commerce. A true and accurate
`
`copy of the Office Action is attached hereto as Exhibit G.
`
`17. On January 31, 2018, Applicant filed a response to the Office Action (the “Office
`
`Action Response”), which included a substitute specimen (the “Substitute Specimen”) claiming to
`
`be product packaging. Also, in the Office Action Response, Applicant’s attorney, Ms. Walters
`
`signed a sworn declaration attesting that “the substitute specimen was in use in commerce at least
`
`as early as the filing date of the application.” A true and accurate copy of the Office Action
`
`Response containing the Substitute Specimen is attached hereto as Exhibit H.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`18. Upon information and belief, the Substitute Specimen does not appear to have been in
`
`commercial use as of the filing date of the AMNIOFLEX Application because the first page of the
`
`Substitute Specimen lists a date of “10/10/2017,” which is over two months after the filing date of
`
`the AMNIOFLEX Application.
`
`19. Opposer began using its AMNIOFIX Mark in interstate commerce with Opposer’s
`
`Goods more than six years before the filing date for the AMNIOFLEX Application, and
`
`approximately three years before Applicant’s Alleged First Use Date for Applicant’s Goods.
`
`20. Applicant is not associated or affiliated with Opposer.
`
`21. Opposer has not consented to the Applicant’s use of the AMNIOFLEX Mark.
`
`COUNT I
`LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION BASED ON PRIORITY OF USE
`PURSUANT TO 15 U.S.C. § 1052(D)
`
`22. Opposer repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 21 above.
`
`23. Opposer first used its AMNIOFIX Mark in commerce prior to the filing date of the
`
`AMNIOFLEX Application and prior to the first use and use in commerce date identified in the
`
`AMNIOFLEX Application for Applicant’s Goods.
`
`24. Opposer’s AMNIOFIX Mark and Applicant’s AMNIOFLEX Mark are substantially
`
`similar in appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression. Both marks include the
`
`prefix “Amnio” and have the same number of syllables. In addition, both marks have an ending
`
`component (i.e. “FIX” and “FLEX) that start with the letter F and end with the letter X, thereby
`
`increasing the similarities between the marks when viewed as a whole. In fact, the only difference
`
`between the marks is two letters.
`
`25. The Applicant’s Goods are highly related to Opposer’s Goods: both products include
`
`amniotic materials used for medical purposes.
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`26. Upon information and belief, the Applicant’s Goods and Opposer’s Goods are sold in
`
`identical or highly similar channels of trade and target the same types of customers.
`
`27. Opposer has been and will be damaged by Applicant’s use and registration of the
`
`AMNIOFLEX Mark because such use and registration is likely to cause confusion, mistake, and
`
`deception by creating the false and misleading impression that Applicant’s Goods are provided by
`
`the Opposer, or are associated or connected with the Opposer, or have the sponsorship,
`
`endorsement, or approval of the Opposer.
`
`28. Accordingly, the AMNIOFLEX Application should be refused pursuant to Trademark
`
`Act § 2(d), 15 U.S.C. § 1052(d), because the Opposer has priority of use and there is a likelihood
`
`of confusion.
`
`COUNT II
`LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION BASED ON PRIORITY OF REGISTRATION
`PURUSANT TO 15 U.S.C. § 1052(D)
`
`29. Opposers repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 28 above.
`
`30. Opposer’s ‘234 Registration for the AMNIOFIX Mark was filed and issued before the
`
`filing date of the AMNIOFLEX Application.
`
`31. Opposer’s ‘224 Registration for the AMNIOFIX Mark was filed before the filing date
`
`of the AMNIOFLEX Application.
`
`32. Opposer’s AMNIOFIX Mark and Applicant’s AMNIOFLEX Mark are substantially
`
`similar in appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression. Both marks include the
`
`prefix “Amnio” and have the same number of syllables. In addition, both marks have an ending
`
`component (i.e. “FIX” and “FLEX) that start with the letter F and end with the letter X, thereby
`
`increasing the similarities between the marks when viewed as a whole. In fact, the only difference
`
`between the marks is two letters.
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`33. Applicant’s Goods are highly related to Opposer’s Goods: both products include
`
`amniotic materials used for medical purposes.
`
`34. Upon information and belief, the Applicant’s Goods and Opposer’s Goods are sold in
`
`identical or highly similar channels of trade and target the same types of customers.
`
`35. Opposer has been and will be damaged by Applicant’s use and registration of the
`
`AMNIOFLEX Mark because such use and registration is likely to cause confusion, mistake, and
`
`deception by creating the false and misleading impression that Applicant’s Goods are provided by
`
`the Opposer, or are associated or connected with the Opposer, or have the sponsorship,
`
`endorsement, or approval of the Opposer.
`
`36. Accordingly, the AMNIOFLEX Application should be refused registration pursuant to
`
`Trademark Act § 2(d), 15 U.S.C. § 1052(d), because the Opposer has priority of use and there is a
`
`likelihood of confusion.
`
`COUNT III
`FRAUD
`
`37. Opposer repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 36 above.
`
`38. On October 30, 2017, the Examining Attorney assigned to examine the AMNIOFLEX
`
`Application issued the Office Action requiring that the Applicant submit a “verified substitute
`
`specimen” showing that the AMNIOFLEX Mark was in commercial use at least as early as the
`
`filing date of the AMNIOFLEX Application.
`
`39. On January 31, 2018, Applicant filed the Office Action Response, which included the
`
`Substitute Specimen described as “specimen packaging (interior pamphlet and exterior
`
`packaging)." See pages 5-7 of Exhibit H.
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`40. The Office Action Response also contained a declaration by the Applicant’s attorney
`
`attesting that “the substitute specimen was in use in commerce at least as early as the filing date
`
`of the application.” See page 2 of Exhibit H.
`
`41. As the trademark filing attorney, Applicant’s attorney was fully aware of the
`
`requirement that the Substitute Specimen must have been in use in commerce at least as early as
`
`the filing date of the AMNIOFLEX Application. Nonetheless, upon information and belief,
`
`Applicant’s Substitute Specimen was not in use in commerce as of the filing date of the
`
`AMNIOFLEX Application because the first page of the Substitute Specimen lists a date of
`
`“10/10/2017,” which is over two months after the filing date of the AMNIOFLEX Application.
`
`See page 5 of Exhibit H.
`
`42. Upon information and belief, Applicant (through Applicant’s attorney) knowingly and
`
`intentionally made false statements as to the date of first use in commerce of the Substitute
`
`Specimen to overcome the Office Action, which shows an intent to procure a registration to which
`
`Applicant was not entitled. These statements amount to fraud on the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office (the “USPTO”) because the Applicant (through Applicant’s attorney) knew that
`
`the Applicant’s Goods were not being sold bearing the AMNIOFLEX Mark as of the filing date
`
`of the AMNIOFLEX Application, and such misrepresentation was a material statement made with
`
`the intent to deceive the USPTO in order to obtain a registration.
`
`43. Additionally, upon information and belief, Applicant knowingly and intentionally
`
`fabricated the Substitute Specimen, which the Applicant submitted in response to the Office
`
`Action’s request for a “verified substitute specimen.” As shown below, the Applicant’s Substitute
`
`Specimen contains a photograph of alleged “exterior packaging”:
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`
`
`44. As an alleged seller of human allograft tissue for nearly four years, Applicant is aware
`
`or should be aware that the Federal Drug Administration (“FDA”) requires a distinct identification
`
`number affixed to the outside of a container or package containing human tissue pursuant to C.F.R.
`
`§ 1271.55(a)(1). Yet, Applicant’s photograph of the alleged “exterior packaging” shows no tissue
`
`identification number in violation of FDA requirements. Even more, Applicant’s photograph of
`
`the alleged “exterior packaging” lacks any sort of critical information required to safely transport
`
`and store human tissue, such as a description of the package contents, storage conditions, or even
`
`an expiration date, among other information. Furthermore, the photograph of the alleged “exterior
`
`packaging” displays “AmnioFlex” in a manner that appears to be glued onto the packaging (see
`
`red arrow above) to fabricate use in commerce. For at least these reasons, the Substitute Specimen
`
`is fabricated and fraudulent.
`
`45. Additionally, Applicant’s Substitute Specimen contains an alleged “interior pamphlet”
`
`as shown below:
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`
`
`46. As shown above, the alleged “interior pamphlet” contains a blank space for placing a
`
`sticker with a tissue identification number (see red arrow above). Upon information and belief, the
`
`alleged “interior pamphlet” appears to be a mock-up of a package insert because it does not contain
`
`any sort of tissue identification number. For at least these reasons, the Substitute Specimen is
`
`fabricated and fraudulent.
`
`47. Accordingly, Applicant knowingly and intentionally generated and filed the fraudulent
`
`Substitute Specimen to overcome the Office Action and fabricate use in commerce, which shows
`
`an intent to procure a registration to which Applicant was not entitled. Such actions amount to
`
`fraud on the USPTO because the Applicant knew the Substitute Specimen was fradulent, and such
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`misrepresentation was a material statement made with the intent to deceive the USPTO in order to
`
`obtain a registration.
`
`48. In summary, the Applicant committed fraud on the USPTO by intentionally and
`
`knowingly submitting false statements and the fraudulent Substitute Specimen with the intent to
`
`deceive the USPTO.
`
`
`
`OPPOSER’S PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Opposer respectfully requests that the Board refuse the registration of
`
`Trademark Application Serial No. 87/546,839 and sustain this Opposition in favor of Opposer.
`
`Respectfully submitted on April 12, 2018,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SPERRY IP LAW LLC
`
`/Marcy L. Sperry/
`Marcy L. Sperry, Esq.
`Georgia Bar No. 455561
`Email: marcy@sperryiplaw.com
`
`Alex J. Aron, Esq.
`Georgia Bar No. 162408
`Email: alex@sperryiplaw.com
`
`3455 Peachtree Rd. NE
`5th Floor
`Atlanta, Georgia 30326
`Phone: 404-474-1600
`
`Attorneys for Opposer.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`MIMEDX GROUP, INC.,
`
`Opposer,
`
`
`v.
`
`TEAM SLX HOLDINGS, LLC,
`Applicant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mark: AMNIOFLEX
`U.S. Application Serial No. 87546839
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on the date below I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NOTICE FOR OPPOSITION, via email, on Counsel for Applicant, Katherine J. Walters of Richie
`
`& Gueringer, P.C. at kwalters@rg-austin.com.
`
`
`
`Date: April 12, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SPERRY IP LAW LLC
`
`/Marcy L. Sperry/
`Marcy L. Sperry, Esq.
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT A
`EXHIBIT A
`
`
`
`

`

`AMNIOFIX
`
`Reg. No, 4,017,234
`
`MIMEDX GROUP, INC. (FLORIDA CORPORATION)
`SUITE B
`
`Registered Aug. 23, 2011 81 1 LIVINGSTON COURT SE
`MARIETTA, GA 30067
`
`Int. CL: 5
`
`TRADEIVIARK
`
`PRINCIPAL REGISTER
`
`EOR: IMPLANTABLE TISSUE DERIVED FROM HUMAN AMNlO'I'IC ELUID CELLS, IN
`CLASS 5 (US. CLS. 6, 18, 44, 46, 51 AND 52).
`
`FIRST USE 1-5-2011; IN COMMERCE 1-5-2011.
`
`THE MARK CONSISTS OF STANDARD CHARACTERS WITHOUT CLAIM TO ANY PAR—
`TICULAR FONT, STYLE, SIZE, 0R COLOR.
`
`SN SSS-196,194, FILED 12-13-2010.
`
`MICHAEL WlENER, EXAMINING A'lvl‘OKNEY
`
`
`
`Director 0me Unized States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`

`

`Reg. No. 5,380,224
`
`Registered Jan. 16, 2018
`
`MiMedx Group, Inc. (FLORIDA CORPORATION)
`1775 West Oak Commons Ct. Ne
`Marietta, GEORGIA 30062
`
`Int. Cl.: 5
`
`Trademark
`
`Principal Register
`
`CLASS 5: Human biological amniotic membrane tissue intended for subsequent implantation
`
`FIRST USE 1-5-2011; IN COMMERCE 1-5-2011
`
`THE MARK CONSISTS OF STANDARD CHARACTERS WITHOUT CLAIM TO ANY
`PARTICULAR FONT STYLE, SIZE OR COLOR
`
`SER. NO. 87-502,991, FILED 06-23-2017
`
`

`

`Reg. No. 5,407,621
`
`Registered Feb. 20, 2018
`
`MiMedx Group, Inc. (FLORIDA CORPORATION)
`1775 West Oak Commons Ct. Ne
`Marietta, GEORGIA 30062
`
`Int. Cl.: 5
`
`Trademark
`
`CLASS 5: biologic drugs for treating inflammation and pain using regenerative tissue
`components
`
`FIRST USE 9-30-2011; IN COMMERCE 9-30-2011
`
`Principal Register
`
`THE MARK CONSISTS OF STANDARD CHARACTERS WITHOUT CLAIM TO ANY
`PARTICULAR FONT STYLE, SIZE OR COLOR
`
`SER. NO. 87-580,508, FILED 08-23-2017
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT B
`EXHIBIT B
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`«.55a...002...3...».mainEns.flmcamfifl.Moo—uIn.“—.aflan—3}
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`,_.-Anew“.—HI.3.3m.:1_..._S...n_u....unnnflgcnn5...“no“...umwnzmrJn_h«as?943,was“:mainV,.
`
`hunfiwu 3939
`
`
`
`mag-Enmom.mania—33:Dnfl
`
`9N34ma.—,—
`
`mainn.—mans—Eu:
`
`4..."
`
`
`
`MES.mom2:...lea—un-
`
`
`
`cmn:wwwuww
`
`annmwnnqfln.bani:min
`
`
`DEaim—cNmr
`
`23...;Dianamadam
`
`
`manmy:5.24050.3n«mug
`
`
`mmummmmumEnxmmcuh3.0..mm
`
`
`
`
`
`0Eng:5.#3...anflea—Emu:a...:53
`
`hod<m
`
`
`
`d.“«mun:Lawn
`
`
`
`255.5banana
`
`
`
`NEH“kg.mam”Euwasqu025.
`
`
`
`
`
`Imam2...:EPfibfli$25..mfimuau
`
`42.:33:22:55..
`
`3mm
`
`MEEQFOANEEl.“
`
`
`
`
`
`0.4.4.3.I.mm..:.........n.a_l_«baa-2mmSE.50manage:a:mafia.
`
`
`
`
`
`.3...12%F25“:32“:—qn...1.33.1.».5ngala.min
`
`
`
`rm.9,.umfiafladmamawnmm
`
`
`
`Jun.
`mnfinI?
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT C
`EXHIBIT C
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
`Via E‐mail (jay@surgilogix.com) and U.S. Mail 
`
`
`
`Mr. Jay Pruski 
`CEO 
`SurgiLogix, LLC 
`11503 NW Military Hwy 
`Building 400, Suite 307 
`San Antonio, TX 78231 
`
`Re: 
`
`Infringement of AmnioFix® Trademark 
`
`Dear Mr. Pruski: 
`
`This firm represents MiMedx Group, Inc. (“MiMedx”) in its U.S. trademark matters. 
`MiMedx  is  the  global  leader  in  the  processing,  marketing,  and  distribution  of  human 
`amniotic  tissue  for  numerous  medical  therapeutic  areas.  MiMedx  owns  the  trademark 
`AmnioFix®  (the  “AmnioFix®  Mark”  or  the  “Mark”),  for  use  in  connection  with  human 
`allograft  tissue,  namely  implantable  tissue  derived  from  human  amniotic  fluid  cells 
`(“MiMedx’s  Goods”  or  the  “Goods”).  In  addition,  MiMedx  owns  an  incontestable  federal 
`trademark  registration,  U.S.  Trademark  Registration  No.  4,017,234,  for  the  AmnioFix® 
`Mark, a copy of which is enclosed. Through widespread and continuous use of the Mark in 
`connection  with  MiMedx’s  amniotic  tissue  products,  the  Mark  has  acquired  a  stellar 
`reputation and tremendous goodwill. 
`
`My  client  recently  learned  that  SurgiLogix,  LLC  (“SurgiLogix”)  is  using  the 
`confusingly similar mark AmnioFLEX (the “Offending Mark”) in connection with identical 
`goods to MiMedx’s Goods, namely human allograft tissue derived from human amniotic 
`fluid cells (the “Offending Goods”). A website screenshot showing SurgiLogix’s use of the 
`Offending Mark is enclosed. Notably, the Offending Mark is substantially similar in sight, 
`sound,  and  commercial  impression  to  the  AmnioFix®  Mark.  Given  the  substantial 
`similarities between the marks and the fact that the parties’ goods appear to be identical, 
`consumers  are  likely  to  mistakenly  believe  that  there  is  an  association  or  relationship 
`between the parties and the parties’ products. 
`
`Accordingly, SurgiLogix’s use of the Offending Mark infringes MiMedx’s federally 
`registered AmnioFix® Mark, in violation of Section 32(1) of the Lanham Trademark Act, 15 
`U.S.C. §  1114(1),  constitutes  unfair  competition  actionable  under  Section  43(a)  of  the 
`Sperry IP Law LLC 
`3455 Peachtree Rd. NE, 5th FL Atlanta, GA 30326 
`404.788.1976 │marcy@sperryiplaw.com 
`
`

`

` 
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
` 
`
` 
`
` 
` 
`
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`
` 
`
`Lanham  Act,  15  U.S.C.  §  1125(a)  and  various  state  laws,  and  constitutes  common  law 
`trademark  infringement  in  violation  of  numerous  state  laws.  Remedies  for  violation  of 
`these  statutes  include  injunctive  relief,  monetary  damages  which  may  be  trebled,  and 
`attorney’s fees. 
`
`MiMedx  would  prefer to  resolve  this dispute  amicably.  To  this  end, our  client 
`requests that SurgiLogix do the following: 
`
`1. Cease and desist from any and all current or planned use of the Offending Mark, 
`and any mark confusingly similar to the AmnioFix® Mark; and 
`
`2. Provide our client with written assurances of the foregoing. 
`
`If  SurgiLogix  complies  with  this  request  our  client  will  consider  this  matter 
`satisfactorily resolved. 
`
`We request that you respond with a written certification of SurgiLogix’s intended 
`compliance with these terms by June 9, 2017. If we do not receive a certification by that 
`time, we will assume that SurgiLogix intends to continue to infringe our client’s valuable 
`trademark rights and we will advise our client to take appropriate action. 
`
`If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me. We 
`look forward to your timely reply. 
`
`Very truly yours, 
`Sperry IP Law LLC 
`
`Marcy L. Sperry 
`
`2
`
`Enclosure 
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AMNIOFIX
`
`Reg. No. 4,017,234
`MIMEDX GROUP, INC. (FLORIDA CORPORATION)
`SUITEB
`Registered Aug. 23, 2011 811 LIVINGSTON couRT sE
`MARIETTA, GA 30067
`Int. Cl.: 5
`
`
`FOR: IMPLANTABLE TISSUE DERIVED FROM HUMAN AMNIOTIC FLUID CELLS, IN
`CLASS 5 (U.S. CLS. 6, 18, 44, 46, 51 AND 52).
`
`FIRST USE 1-5-2011; IN COMMERCE 1-5-2011.
`
`THE MARK CONSISTS OF STANDARD CHARACTERS WITHOUT CLAIM TO ANY PAR-
`TICULAR FONT, STYLE, SIZE, OR COLOR.
`
`SN 85-196,194, FILED 12-13-2010.
`
`MICHAEL WIENER, EXAMINING ATTORNEY
`
`TRADEMARK
`PRINCIPAL REGISTER
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`REQUIREMENTS TO MAINTAIN YOUR FEDERAL
`TRADEMARK REGISTRATION
`
`
`
`
`
`Requirements in the First Ten Years*
`What and When to File:
`
`First Filing Deadline: You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) between the
`5th and 6th years after the registration date. See 15 U.S.C. §§1058, 1141k. If the declaration is
`accepted, the registration will continue in force for the remainder of the ten-year period, calculated
`from the registration date, unless cancelled by an order of the Commissioner for Trademarks or a
`federal court.
`
`Second Filing Deadline: You must file a Declaration of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) and an
`Application for Renewal between the 9th and 10th years after the registration date.*
`See 15 U.S.C. §1059.
`
`Requirements in Successive Ten-Year Periods*
`What and When to File:
`
`You must file a Declaration ofU se (or Excusable Nonuse) and an Application for Renewal between
`every 9th and 10th-year period, calculated from the registration date.*
`
`Grace Period Filings*
`
`The above documents will be accepted as timely if filed within six months after the deadlines listed above
`with the payment of an additional fee.
`
`
`
`*ATTENTION MADRID PROTOCOL REGISTRANTS: The holder of an international registration with
`an extension of protection to the United States under the Madrid Protocol must timely file the Declarations
`of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) referenced above directly with the USPTO. The time periods for filing are
`based on the U.S. registration date (not the international registration date). The deadlines and grace periods
`for the Declarations of Use (or Excusable Nonuse) are identical to those for nationally issued registrations.
`See 15 U.S.C. §§1058, 114lk. However, owners of international registrations do not file renewal applications
`at the USPTO. Instead, the holder must file a renewal of the underlying international registration at the
`International Bureau of the World Intellectual Property Organization, under Article 7 of the Madrid Protocol,
`before the expiration of each ten-year term of protection, calculated from the date of the international
`registration. See 15 U.S.C. §1141j. For more information and renewal forms for the international registration,
`see http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/.
`
`NOTE: Fees and requirements for maintaining registrations are subject to change. Please check the
`USPTO website for further information. With the exception of renewal applications for registered
`extensions of protection, you can file the registration maintenance documents referenced above online
`at http://www.uspto.gov.
`
`Page: 2 /RN# 4,017,234
`
`

`

` 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 
`
`
`
`
`
`Liquid amniotic fluid allograft for wounds - AmnioFLEX
`
`Home / AmnioFLEX
`
`Liquid Amniotic Fluid Allograft
`
`AmnioFLEX™
`
`Liquid allograft to supplement damaged
`tissue
`
`
`
`Non-invasive, in-office application
`
`Contains minimally manipulated amnion
`
`Contains living cells derived from amniotic
`fluid
`May aid in wound healing and tissue repair
`
`Cryopreserved, easy to apply liquid
`injection
`
`Chorion-free
`
`Amniotic Fluid Allograft
`AmnioFLEX™ is an amniotic fluid allograft comprised of minimally manipulated amniotic
`membrane and amniotic fluid-derived cells obtained from the placental tissue of consenting
`mothers at the time of a live, full-term, elective Cesarean birth. There is no harm to the donor
`
`http://www.surgilogix.com/products/amnioflex/[5/26/2017 2:43:03 PM]
`
`

`

`Liquid amniotic fluid allograft for wounds - AmnioFLEX
`mother or new born baby.
`
` 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Cryopreserved Liquid
`AmnioFLEX™ comes in an easy-to-use, liquid format. It can be applied topically or implanted
`during an in-office procedure. It is cryopreserved for safe, long-term storage and ease of
`handling, and is available in a variety of volumes.
`
`Properties of Amniotic Tissue
`Amniotic tissue is rich with the bioactive components also known to be active in tissue repair
`and wound healing. Amniotic fluid and membrane contains collagen substrates, growth factors,
`amino acids, carbohydrates, and cytokines, which are known to facilitate migration and
`proliferation cells to the site of injury and help construct a natural scaffold on which new tissue
`growth can occur.
`
`Storage Temperature
`
`-80°C +/- 15°C
`
`Typical Expiry
`
`2 years
`
`Chorion-free
`Unlike other amniotic tissue allografts on the market, Surgilogix allografts do not contain chorion.
`The amniotic membrane consists of two layers, the amnion and chorion. The chorion layer is on
`the maternal side and may contain maternal antigens. Because this layer of the amniotic
`membrane is removed from SurgiLogix allografts, the risk of an adverse reaction in the patient is
`reduced.
`
`http://www.surgilogix.com/products/amnioflex/[5/26/2017 2:43:03 PM]
`
` 
`
`

`

`Liquid amniotic fluid allograft for wounds - AmnioFLEX
`
` 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Allograft vs. Graft
`
`
`
`Human amniotic tissue applied in a simple
`in-office procedure.
`
`Throughout the site we use the term amniotic fluid allografts interchangeably amniotic fluid
`grafts. The word graft is defined simply as a piece of living tissue that is transplanted surgically.
`However, all our tissues are allografts, indicating the donor and recipient are of the same
`species (in our case, human) but are not genetically identical.
`
`http://www.surgilogix.com/products/amnioflex/[5/26/2017 2:43:03 PM]
`
` 
`
`

`

`Liquid amniotic fluid allograft for wounds - AmnioFLEX
`
` 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PRODUCT
`CODE
`
`SXFlex-M
`
`SXFlex-L
`
`SXFlex-XL
`
`DESCRIPTION
`
`AmnioFLEXTM
`Medium
`
`AmnioFLEXTM Large
`
`AmnioFLEXTM X-
`Large
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SIZE
`
`0.5ml
`
`1.0ml
`
`2.0ml
`
`http://www.surgilogix