Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`ESTTA975989
`
`Filing date:
`
`05/24/2019
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Proceeding
`
`91243104
`
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Plaintiff
`Salt Life, LLC
`
`JASON A PITTMAN
`DORITY & MANNING PA
`75 BEATTIE PLACE, SUITE 1100
`GREENVILLE, SC 29601
`UNITED STATES
`jpittman@dority-manning.com, kpruitt@dority-manning.com, litdocket-
`ing@dority-manning.com
`864-271-1592
`
`Submission
`
`Filer's Name
`
`Filer's email
`
`Signature
`
`Date
`
`Motion to Compel Discovery or Disclosure
`
`Jason Pittman
`
`jpittman@dority-manning.com
`
`/jason a pittman/
`
`05/24/2019
`
`Attachments
`
`2nd Motion to Compel Discovery w Exhibits FINAL.pdf(4257552 bytes )
`
`

`

`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`In the matter of trademark application Serial No. 87/753,722
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SALT LIFE, LLC,
`
`Opposition No. 91243104
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Opposer,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Serial No. 87/753,722
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mark: SALT LIFE SOLUTIONS
`SALT LIFE SOLUTIONS, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Applicant.
`
`
`OPPOSER’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
`
`
`
`Salt Life, LLC (referred to hereinafter as “Opposer”), pursuant to TBMP §523, hereby
`
`moves and respectfully requests that the Board issue an order compelling Applicant, Salt Life
`
`Solutions, LLC (referred to hereinafter as “Applicant”), to provide complete and proper
`
`responses to Opposer’s Second Set of Interrogatories and Second Set of Requests for Production
`
`(collectively “Opposer’s Second Set of Discovery Requests”). Opposer’s Second Set of
`
`Discovery Requests and Opposer’s Requests for Admission are attached hereto as Exhibit A.
`
`Applicant’s deficient responses to Opposer’s Second Set of Interrogatories are attached hereto as
`
`Exhibit B. Applicant has not responded to the Second Set of Requests for Production or
`
`Requests for Admission.
`
`To date, Applicant has not timely answered any of the discovery requests served by
`
`Opposer in this action and Applicant has not provided any basis for its uncooperative and
`
`dilatory discovery practices. See, e.g., First Motion to Compel, 6 TTABVUE 1-2. In fact, this is
`
`the second motion to compel that Opposer has been forced to file in this proceeding (the first
`
`having been granted on May 1, 2019). See Order Granting Motion to Compel, 8 TTABVUE 1.
`
`Prior to filing this Motion, the undersigned counsel for Opposer contacted counsel for Applicant
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`on several occasions regarding Applicant’s deficient discovery responses and Applicant’s failure
`
`to respond to Opposer’s Second Set of Discovery Requests in a good faith attempt to resolve the
`
`issues raised by this motion pursuant to TBMP §523.02. More specifically, Opposer’s good faith
`
`attempt to resolve the issues raised by this motion included written correspondence dated May 1,
`
`2019, concerning Applicant’s failure to respond to Opposer’s Second Set of Discovery Requests,
`
`responses to which were due on April 11, 2019. See Exhibit C. In this May 1 correspondence,
`
`Opposer requested that Applicant serve discovery responses within five (5) days, but Applicant
`
`failed to provide discovery responses within the requested time period. Accordingly, the
`
`undersigned contacted Applicant a second time via email on May 7, 2019 with respect to
`
`Applicant’s failure to respond to Opposer’s Second Set of Discovery Requests. Id. Applicant’s
`
`counsel replied on May 7, 2019 indicating that Applicant “should be able to respond by the end
`
`of the week” (May 10, 2019). Id. Applicant failed to provide discovery responses by May 10,
`
`2019. Accordingly, on May 13, 2019, the undersigned again contacted counsel for Applicant
`
`regarding Applicant’s failure to provide discovery responses by May 10th as was represented by
`
`Applicant. Id. In response, it was represented that discovery responses would be provided on
`
`May 14, 2019. Id. However, on May 14, 2019, Applicant only provided responses to Opposer’s
`
`Second Set of Interrogatories. Id. See also, Exhibit B. Notably, Applicant’s interrogatory
`
`responses were simply a regurgitation of the same deficient responses that forced Opposer to file
`
`its first Motion to Compel (i.e., the vague and improper response that the Interrogatories were
`
`“Not Applicable”). See Exhibit B at 1. See also, First Motion to Compel, 6 TTABVUE 3-4; and
`
`Order Granting Motion to Compel, 8 TTABVUE 1. Despite multiple representations that
`
`Applicant’s discovery responses were forthcoming, Applicant has still failed to provide any
`
`response to Opposer’s Second Set of Requests for Production or produce documents requested
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`therein. As of today, Applicant’s responses to Opposer’s Second Set of Requests for Production
`
`are 43 days overdue.
`
`On May 15, 2019, in a good faith attempt to resolve issues raised by this motion, the
`
`undersigned counsel for Opposer sent counsel for Applicant a letter addressing the deficiencies
`
`in the responses to the Second Set of Interrogatories and Applicant’s failure to respond to the
`
`Second Requests for Production. See Exhibit D. This letter requested a response by May 17,
`
`2019. Id. To date, Applicant has not responded to this correspondence or provided proper
`
`discovery responses.
`
`
`
`“The Board expects parties (and their attorneys or other authorized representatives) to
`
`cooperate with one another in the discovery process, and looks with extreme disfavor on those
`
`who do not.” TBMP §408.01. In the present case, Applicant has failed to provide complete and
`
`proper responses to Opposer’s Second Set of Interrogatories and has failed to provide any
`
`response to Opposer’s Second Requests for Production. Applicant has also failed to respond to
`
`any of Opposer’s efforts to resolve the deficiencies in Applicant’s responses to the Second Set of
`
`Interrogatories. For these reasons and those more fully set forth herein, Opposer respectfully
`
`requests that the Board issue an order compelling Applicant to provide complete and proper
`
`responses to Opposer’s Second Set of Interrogatories and Second Set of Requests for Production.
`
`Furthermore, Applicant respectfully requests that the Board issue an order finding that each and
`
`every one of Opposer’s Requests for Admission have been admitted by Applicant as a result of
`
`Applicant’s failure to timely respond to or object to said Requests.
`
`A. Applicant Has Waived Any and All Objections to Opposer’s Second Set of
`Discovery Requests
`
`Opposer’s Second Set of Discovery Requests was served on March 12, 2019. See Exhibit
`
`A. Accordingly, Applicant’s discovery responses were due on April 11, 2019. See Fed. R. Civ.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`P. 33(b)(2); Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(A). Applicant failed to timely serve responses or objections
`
`to Opposer’s Second Set of Discovery Requests, responding only to the interrogatories thirty-
`
`four (34) days late.1 Because Applicant did not timely serve responses or objections, Applicant
`
`has waived any and all objections to Opposer’s Second Set of Discovery Requests. See Fed. R.
`
`Civ. P. 33(b)(4). See also M.C.I. Foods, Inc. v. Bunte, 2008 TTAB LEXIS 9, *7, 86 U.S.P.Q.2D
`
`(BNA) 1044, 1047 (Trademark Trial & App. Bd. February 19, 2008) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P.
`
`33(b)(4); Envirotech Corp. v. Compagnie Des Lampes, 219 USPQ 448, 449 (TTAB 1979)).
`
`For this reason, Applicant has waived any and all objections to Opposer’s Second Set of
`
`Discovery Requests and Opposer respectfully requests that the Board issue an order compelling
`
`Applicant to provide complete and proper responses to Opposer’s Second Set of Interrogatories
`
`and Second Set of Requests for Production.
`
`B. Applicant’s “Not Applicable” Interrogatory Responses
`
`Applicant has responded to all but one of Opposer’s Second Set of Interrogatories with
`
`the vague response of “Not Applicable.” See Exhibit B, Interrogatory Responses 23-27, and 29.
`
`This is the exact same deficient response that was the subject of Opposer’s First Motion to
`
`Compel, which was granted just three weeks ago. See, e.g., First Motion to Compel, 6
`
`TTABVUE 3-4. See also Order Granting Motion to Compel, 8 TTABVUE 1. Once again, these
`
`responses are incomplete, vague and are not capable of being clearly understood considering the
`
`discovery requests to which this “Not Applicable” response has been provided. More
`
`specifically, it is unclear whether Applicant is attempting to state an objection to the discovery
`
`request or if this response is intended to have another meaning. For example, it is unclear if the
`
`“Not Applicable” response is intended to confirm that Applicant does not have information or
`
`documents responsive to the discovery request.
`
`1 See Exhibit B
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`To the extent Applicant is attempting to state an objection, such an objection is improper
`
`at least because it has been waived for the reasons stated hereinabove. The Applicant must
`
`clearly, separately and fully answer each discovery request. See TBMP §408.02 (“With regard to
`
`document product requests, a proper written response to each request requires the responding
`
`party to state that there are responsive documents … that … will be produced … or to state that
`
`no responsive documents exist.”); TBMP §405.04 (a response to each interrogatory “must be
`
`made separately and fully”). Indeed, if Applicant does not possess documents or information
`
`responsive to any of the discovery requests, it is incumbent upon Applicant to clearly state this
`
`fact. See, e.g., TBMP §406.04(c) (“It is incumbent upon a responding party to respond to each
`
`request by stating whether or not responsive documents exist…”).
`
`For these reasons, Applicant’s responses to Interrogatories 23-27, and 29 are deficient
`
`and improper. Opposer respectfully requests that the Board issue an order compelling Applicant
`
`to provide full, complete and clear responses to these discovery requests that are capable of being
`
`understood and which comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the TBMP.
`
`C.
`
`Applicant’s Responses to Interrogatory Nos. 24 and 27
`
`
`
`Applicant’s responses to Interrogatory Nos. 242 and 27 are deficient. More specifically,
`
`these Interrogatories seek information related to a specific witness associated with an email
`
`account. Applicant has failed to provide any responsive information.
`
`Indeed, Applicant has failed to identify the person associated with the email address:
`
`amitkesar84@gmail.com, even though this email was identified as at least one of the
`
`
`2 Opposer inadvertently identified two interrogatories as “Interrogatory 24.” This paragraph relates to the first
`interrogatory, which is as follows:
`
`24. Give the name(s), address(es) and telephone number(s) of person(s) that own or utilize the following email
`address: amitkesar84@gmail.com.
`
`It appears that Applicant has identified this as Interrogatory 23 in its May 14, 2019 responses.
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`correspondence addresses related to the trademark application at issue. Applicant’s responses
`
`are clearly incomplete and evasive.
`
`For these reasons, Applicant’s responses to these discovery requests are improper.
`
`Opposer respectfully requests that the Board issue an order compelling Applicant to provide full
`
`and complete responses to these discovery requests.
`
`D.
`
`Applicant’s Response to Interrogatory Nos. 24 – 26
`
`Applicant’s responses to Interrogatory Nos. 243 through 26 are deficient. More
`
`specifically, these Interrogatories seek information related to specific witnesses that were
`
`vaguely, but not specifically identified in Applicant’s prior discovery responses. Applicant has
`
`failed to provide any responsive information despite having previously referenced these
`
`witnesses in other discovery responses. Applicant’s current responses are clearly incomplete and
`
`evasive.
`
`For these reasons, Applicant’s responses to these discovery requests are improper.
`
`Opposer respectfully requests that the Board issue an order compelling Applicant to provide full
`
`and complete responses to these discovery requests.
`
`E.
`
`Applicant’s Failure to Respond to the Requests for Admission
`
`As part of Opposer’s Second Set of Discovery Requests, Opposer served Requests for
`
`Admission 1-6 on March 12, 2019. See Exhibit A. Applicant failed to timely answer or object to
`
`these Requests for Admission and seventy-four (74) days have passed since these Requests were
`
`served. For this reason, the Requests for Admission have been admitted pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
`
`
`3 Opposer inadvertently identified two interrogatories as “Interrogatory 24.” This relates to the second interrogatory,
`which is as follows:
`
`24. Give the name(s), address(es) and telephone number(s) of person(s) that you communicated with at
`GraphicSprings.com related to Your Mark and/or your purchase of “the logo” from GraphicSprings.com as
`referenced in your answer to Interrogatory No. 1.
`
`It appears that Applicant has identified this as Interrogatory 24 in its May 14, 2019 responses.
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`P. 36(a)(3). See TBMP §407.03(a). Therefore, Opposer respectfully requests that the Board
`
`issue an Order finding that each and every one of Opposer’s Requests for Admission have been
`
`admitted by Applicant as a result of Applicant’s failure to timely respond or object to said
`
`Requests.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`
`
`Applicant has failed to provide complete and proper responses to Opposer’s Discovery
`
`Requests and has failed to meaningfully respond to Opposer’s good faith efforts to remedy the
`
`issue. For these reasons, Opposer respectfully requests that the Board issue an order compelling
`
`Applicant to provide complete and proper responses to Opposer’s Second Set of Discovery
`
`Requests and that the Board issue an Order holding that the Requests for Admission have been
`
`admitted.
`
`
`DATED: May 24, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`__/ Jason A Pittman / ___
`Jason A. Pittman
`jpittman@dority-manning.com
`DORITY & MANNING, P.A.
`75 Beattie Place, Suite 1100
`Greenville, SC 29601
`Phone: 864-271-1592
`Fax: 864-335-0127
`
`Attorney for Opposer
`Salt Life, LLC
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on May 24, 2019, I served a true and complete copy of the foregoing
`
`OPPOSER’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY on opposing counsel via email as
`
`follows:
`
`
`Michael D. Stewart, Esq.
`150 SE 2nd Ave, Suite 1000
`Miami, Florida 33131
`ms@themiamilaw.com
`
`
` / Jason A. Pittman /
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Jason A. Pittman
`
`
`
`
`
`
`jpittman@dority-manning.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DORITY & MANNING, P.A.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`75 Beattie Place, Suite 1100
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Greenville, SC 29601
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Phone: 864-271-1592
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Fax: 864-335-0127
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit A
`Exhibit A
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Applicant.
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`In the matter of trademark application Serial No. 87/753,722
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SALT LIFE, LLC,
`
`Opposition No. 91243104
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Opposer,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Serial No. 87/753,722
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mark: SALT LIFE SOLUTIONS
`SALT LIFE SOLUTIONS, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SALT LIFE, LLC’S SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO APPLICANT
`
`
`
`Salt Life, LLC (referred to hereinafter as “Salt Life” or “Opposer”) by and through its
`
`undersigned attorneys, requests that Applicant, Salt Life Solutions, LLC, (referred to hereinafter
`
`as “Applicant”), within thirty (30) days after service hereof, answer the Interrogatories
`
`hereinafter set forth, in accordance with 37 CFR §2.120 and Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of
`
`Civil Procedure. These Interrogatories are continuing in character and require supplemental
`
`answers in accordance with Rule 26(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, if before trial the
`
`party to whom these Interrogatories are directed obtains further or different information after the
`
`initial answer. Supplemental answers should include the date upon and manner in which such
`
`further or different information came to the attention of the answering party.
`
`As used herein, the following terms are defined as indicated:
`
`DEFINITIONS
`
`A.
`
`The term "document" means anything which may be considered to be a document
`
`or tangible thing within the meaning of Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and
`
`includes the original and any copy of any written, printed, recorded, graphic, or photographic
`
`matter, sound reproduction, chart, tape, disc, card, wire, and any other electronic or mechanical
`
`1
`
`

`

`recording or transcript of any other instrument or device which contains any information or from
`
`which any information can be derived or retrieved. The term "document" also includes copies
`
`containing any information in addition to or in any way different from that contained in or on the
`
`original, and all attachments, enclosures, or documents affixed or referred to in any documents
`
`identified in response to any of the following Interrogatories.
`
`B.
`
`The term "person" means any natural person, public, or private corporation,
`
`partnership, joint venture, association, or governmental entity (including any governmental
`
`agency or political sub-division of any government), any group, any form of business or legal
`
`organization or agreement.
`
`C.
`
`The terms "identify" and "identity" when used in connection with any of the
`
`following terms mean and require you to state:
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`With respect to a natural person:
`a.
`Such person's name, present or last known address, and present
`telephone number;
`If employed by you, each position and title during his or her
`employment; and
`If employed by you, the nature and description of his or her duties
`and responsibilities in each position indicated.
`
`With respect to a document:
`a.
`The date and type of document (i.e. letter, memorandum, telegram,
`etc.).
`The subject matter or substance of the document.
`The identity of each author, addressee, and person copied on the
`document.
`The identity of all persons who now have custody of the document
`or a copy of the document.
`If any such document was at any time in the possession, custody,
`or control of your company but is no longer, whether such
`document is missing, lost, destroyed, or has been transferred,
`voluntarily or involuntary, to any other person or otherwise
`disposed of and the circumstances surrounding it, the authorization
`given, if any, for such disposition, and the identity of person or
`persons to whom such documents were transferred, if any.
`
`
`b.
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`2
`
`

`

`D.
`
`The pronoun "you" refers to the party or parties to whom these Interrogatories are
`
`addressed and directed and to its subsidiaries, officers, employees, representatives, agents, and
`
`unless privileged, its attorneys.
`
`E.
`
`The use of the singular herein shall be determined to include the plural and the
`
`masculine and the feminine, as appropriate in the context.
`
`F.
`
`The terms “Your Mark(s)” or “Opposing Mark(s)” means the mark(s) that is/are
`
`the subject of U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 87/753,722.
`
`G.
`
`The term “Opposer’s Mark(s)” or “Salt Life Mark(s)” means the marks that are
`
`identified in and are the basis for the Notice of Opposition filed in the above matter.
`
`INTERROGATORIES
`
`24.
`
`Give the name(s), address(es) and telephone number(s) of person(s) that own or
`
`utilize the following email address: amitkesar84@gmail.com.
`
`24.
`
`Give the name(s), address(es) and telephone number(s) of person(s) that you
`
`communicated with at GraphicSprings.com related to Your Mark and/or your purchase of “the
`
`logo” from GraphicSprings.com as referenced in your answer to Interrogatory No. 1.
`
`25.
`
`Give the name(s), address(es) and telephone number(s) of the employee from
`
`upwork.com referenced in your answer to Interrogatory No. 22.
`
`26.
`
`Describe in detail any and all work performed by or on your behalf by the
`
`employee from upwork.com referenced in your answer to Interrogatory No. 22.
`
`27.
`
`Describe in detail any and all involvement that the person that owns or utilizes the
`
`email address amitkesar84@gmail.com had with respect to Your Mark, the U.S. Trademark
`
`Office and/or U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 87/753,722.
`
`28.
`
`Set forth in detail any and all facts that you will rely upon to show your intent to
`
`use Your Mark for “Installation, maintenance, and repair of computers and printers; Consultation
`
`3
`
`

`

`about the repair of computer hardware; Installation, maintenance, and repair of computer
`
`networking hardware” as of January 12, 2018.
`
`29.
`
`Set forth in detail the basis for your denial of any of the Requests for Admission
`
`served in this matter.
`
`
`
`DATED: March 12, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`___
`
`__
`Jason A. Pittman
`jpittman@dority-manning.com
`DORITY & MANNING, P.A.
`75 Beattie Place, Suite 1100
`Greenville, SC 29601
`Phone: 864-271-1592
`Fax: 864-335-0127
`
`Attorney for Opposer
`Salt Life, LLC
`
`4
`
`

`

`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on March 12, 2019, I served a true and complete copy of the
`
`foregoing SALT LIFE, LLC’S SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO APPLICANT
`
`on opposing counsel via email as follows:
`
`
`Michael D. Stewart, Esq.
`150 SE 2nd Ave, Suite 1000
`Miami, Florida 33131
`ms@themiamilaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Jason A. Pittman
`
`
`
`
`
`
`jpittman@dority-manning.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DORITY & MANNING, P.A.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`75 Beattie Place, Suite 1100
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Greenville, SC 29601
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Phone: 864-271-1592
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Fax: 864-335-0127
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`In the matter of trademark application Serial No. 87/753,722
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SALT LIFE, LLC
`
`Opposition No. 91243104
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Opposer,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Serial No. 87/753,722
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mark: SALT LIFE SOLUTIONS
`SALT LIFE SOLUTIONS, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Applicant.
`
`
`
`
`SALT LIFE, LLC’S SECOND SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION TO
`APPLICANT
`
`
`
`Salt Life, LLC (referred to hereinafter as “Salt Life” or “Opposer”) by and through its
`
`undersigned attorneys, requests that Applicant, Salt Life Solutions, Inc., (referred to hereinafter
`
`as “Applicant”), within thirty (30) days after service hereof, answer the Requests hereinafter set
`
`forth, in accordance with 37 CFR §2.120 and Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
`
`and within thirty (30) days after the service hereof, produce and permit Opposer to inspect, copy
`
`or photograph each of the following documents or things, which may be in the possession,
`
`custody or control of Applicant, or its attorneys which constitute or contain evidence relating to
`
`the claim or defense of the within cause.
`
`Further, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 26(e), these Requests shall be
`
`deemed to continue from the time of service until the time of trial of this action so that
`
`information sought, which comes to the knowledge of Applicant, or its representative or
`
`attorney, after original responses have been submitted, shall be promptly transmitted to Opposer.
`
`Supplemental responses should include the date upon and manner in which such further or
`
`different information came to the attention of the answering party.
`
`1
`
`

`

`As used herein, the following terms are defined as indicated:
`
`DEFINITIONS
`
`A.
`
`The term "document" means anything which may be considered to be a document
`
`or tangible thing within the meaning of Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and
`
`includes the original and any copy of any written, printed, recorded, graphic, or photographic
`
`matter, sound reproduction, chart, tape, disc, card, wire, and any other electronic or mechanical
`
`recording or transcript of any other instrument or device which contains any information or from
`
`which any information can be derived or retrieved. The term "document" also includes copies
`
`containing any information in addition to or in any way different from that contained in or on the
`
`original, and all attachments, enclosures, or documents affixed or referred to in any documents
`
`identified in response to any of the following Requests.
`
`B.
`
`The term "person" means any natural person, public, or private corporation,
`
`partnership, joint venture, association, or governmental entity (including any governmental
`
`agency or political sub-division of any government), any group, any form of business or legal
`
`organization or agreement.
`
`C.
`
`The terms "identify" and "identity" when used in connection with any of the
`
`following terms mean and require you to state:
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`With respect to a natural person:
`a.
`Such person's name, present or last known address, and present
`telephone number;
`If employed by you, each position and title during his or her
`employment; and
`If employed by you, the nature and description of his or her duties
`and responsibilities in each position indicated.
`
`With respect to a document:
`a.
`The date and type of document (i.e. letter, memorandum, telegram,
`etc.).
`The subject matter or substance of the document.
`The identity of each author, addressee, and person copied on the
`
`b.
`c.
`
`2
`
`

`

`e.
`
`d.
`
`document.
`The identity of all persons who now have custody of the document
`or a copy of the document.
`If any such document was at any time in the possession, custody,
`or control of your company but is no longer, whether such
`document is missing, lost, destroyed, or has been transferred,
`voluntarily or involuntary, to any other person or otherwise
`disposed of and the circumstances surrounding it, the authorization
`given, if any, for such disposition, and the identity of person or
`persons to whom such documents were transferred, if any.
`
`The pronoun "you" refers to the party or parties to whom these Requests are
`
`D.
`
`addressed and directed and to its subsidiaries, officers, employees, representatives, agents, and
`
`unless privileged, its attorneys.
`
`E.
`
`The use of the singular herein shall be determined to include the plural and the
`
`masculine and the feminine, as appropriate in the context.
`
`F.
`
`The terms “Your Mark(s)” or “Opposing Mark(s)” means the mark(s) that is/are
`
`the subject of U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 87/753,722.
`
`G.
`
`The term “Opposer’s Mark(s)” or “Salt Life Mark(s)” means the marks that are
`
`identified in and are the basis for the Notice of Opposition filed in the above matter.
`
`REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION
`
`33.
`
`Produce copies of any and all documents referenced in Applicant’s Rule 26(a)(1)
`
`disclosures in this case.
`
`34.
`
`Produce any and all documents related to your alleged purchase of “the logo”
`
`from GraphicSprings.com as referenced in your answer to Interrogatory No. 1.
`
`35.
`
`Produce any and all communications between you and any representative of
`
`GraphicSprings.com, including those related to Your Mark and/or your purchase of “the logo”
`
`from GraphicSprings.com as referenced in your answer to Interrogatory No. 1.
`
`3
`
`

`

`36.
`
`Produce any and all documents related to the research performed by upwork.com
`
`and referenced in your answer to Interrogatory No. 22.
`
`37.
`
`Produce any and all documents related to the work performed by or on your
`
`behalf by the employee from upwork.com referenced in your answer to Interrogatory No. 22.
`
`38.
`
`Produce any and all documents related in any way to your intent to use Your
`
`Mark for “Installation, maintenance, and repair of computers and printers; Consultation about the
`
`repair of computer hardware; Installation, maintenance, and repair of computer networking
`
`hardware” as of January 12, 2018.
`
`39.
`
`Produce
`
`any
`
`and
`
`all
`
`communications
`
`to,
`
`from
`
`or
`
`including
`
`amitkesar84@gmail.com related in any way to Your Mark, the U.S. Trademark Office and/or
`
`U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 87/753,722.
`
`40.
`
`Produce any and all documents that you will rely on to show that the word
`
`“SOLUTIONS” is not generic with respect to the goods and/or services listed in U.S. Trademark
`
`Application Serial No. 87/753,722.
`
`41.
`
`Produce any and all documents that you will rely on to show that the word
`
`“SOLUTIONS” has any weight as a source identifying component of Your Mark.
`
`42.
`
`Produce any and all documents related to your advertising expenditures identified
`
`in your answer to Interrogatory No. 20, including, but not limited to, copies of said
`
`advertisements, communications regarding said advertisements, the outlets or methods for that
`
`advertising.
`
`43.
`
`Produce any and all documents related to your knowledge of Opposer and/or
`
`Opposer’s Marks before any use of Your Mark and/or filing U.S. Trademark Application Serial
`
`No. 87/753,722.
`
`4
`
`

`

`44.
`
`Produce documents sufficient to identify the locations within the United States
`
`where you have sold products under or bearing Your Mark.
`
`45.
`
`Produce documents sufficient to show the use of Your Mark in commerce before
`
`January 12, 2018.
`
`46.
`
`Produce documents sufficient to show each and every form in which you have
`
`used Your Mark in commerce, including on product packaging, instructions, advertising,
`
`invoices or the like.
`
`47.
`
`Produce any and all documents related to any action taken by “the individual who
`
`was helping [you] with [your] first trademark,” referenced in your April 27, 2018
`
`communication to the Trademark Examining Attorney, relevant to U.S. Trademark Application
`
`Serial No. 87/753,722.
`
`48.
`
`Produce any and all communications between with or to “the individual who was
`
`helping [you] with [your] first trademark,” referenced in your April 27, 2018 communication to
`
`the Trademark Examining Attorney, relevant to U.S. Trademark Application Serial No.
`
`87/753,722.
`
`49.
`
`Produce any and all documents that you will use or rely on to support any of the
`
`affirmative defenses asserted in this action.
`
`DATED: March 12, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`___
`Jason A. Pittman
`jpittman@dority-manning.com
`DORITY & MANNING, P.A.
`75 Beattie Place, Suite 1100
`Greenville, SC 29601
`Phone: 864-271-1592
`Fax: 864-335-0127
`Attorney for Opposer
`Salt Life, LLC
`
`5
`
`

`

`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on March 12, 2019, I served a true and complete copy of the
`
`foregoing SALT LIFE, LLC’S SECOND SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION TO
`
`APPLICANT on opposing counsel via email as follows:
`
`Michael D. Stewart, Esq.
`150 SE 2nd Ave, Suite 1000
`Miami, Florida 33131
`ms@themiamilaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Jason A. Pittman
`jpittman@dority-manning.com
`DORITY & MANNING, P.A.
`75 Beattie Place, Suite 1100
`Greenville, SC 29601
`Phone: 864-271-1592
`Fax: 864-335-0127
`
`6
`
`

`

`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`In the matter of trademark application Serial No. 87/753,722
`
`SALT LIFE, LLC,
`
`v.
`
`SALT LIFE SOLUTIONS, LLC,
`
`Opposer,
`
`Opposition No. 91243104
`
`Serial No. 87/753,722
`
`Mark: SALT LIFE SOLUTIONS
`
`Applicant.
`
`SALT LIFE, LLC’S REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION TO APPLICANT
`
`Salt Life, LLC (referred to hereinafter as “Salt Life” or “Opposer”) by and through its
`
`undersigned attorneys, requests that Applicant, Salt Life Solutions, LLC, (referred to hereinafter
`
`as “Applicant”), within thirty (30) days after service hereof, answer the Requests For Admission
`
`hereinafter set forth, in accordance with 37 CFR §2.120 and Rule 36 of the Federal Rules of
`
`Civil Procedure.
`
`As used herein, the following terms are defined as indicated:
`
`DEFINIT