Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`ESTTA1008117
`
`Filing date:
`
`10/10/2019
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Proceeding
`
`91250842
`
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Defendant
`Bien-Aime, Jocelyn
`
`DEREK FAHEY
`THE PLUS IP FIRM, PLLC
`101 NE 3RD AVENUE, SUITE 1500
`FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301
`derek@plusfirm.com, info@faheyiplaw.com
`no phone number provided
`
`Submission
`
`Filer's Name
`
`Filer's email
`
`Signature
`
`Date
`
`Answer
`
`Derek Fahey
`
`derek@plusfirm.com, info@plusfirm.com, jill@plusfirm.com
`
`/Derek Fahey/
`
`10/10/2019
`
`Attachments
`
`BienAime-TTAB-91250842-for-filing.pdf(104544 bytes )
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Medica Health Plans,
`
`
`Opposer,
`
`
` v.
`
`Jocelyn Bien-Aime,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Opposition No. 91250842
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Applicant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLICANT’S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
`TO NOTICE OF OPPOSITION
`
`
`
`
`
`Jocelyn Bien-Aime (“Applicant”), by and through its attorneys, hereby answers the Notice
`
`of Opposition (the “Notice”) filed by Medica Health Plans (the “Opposer”) as follows. To the
`
`extent not explicitly admitted, all allegations in the opposition are denied.
`
`ANSWER
`
`Applicant admits to the facts alleged in Paragraph 1 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant admits to the facts alleged in Paragraph 2 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant admits to the facts alleged in Paragraph 3 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant admits to the facts alleged in Paragraph 4 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`of the matters alleged in Paragraph 5 of the Notice and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`6.
`
`Applicant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the matters alleged in Paragraph 6 of the Notice and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`

`

`Opposition No. 91250842
`
`7.
`
`Applicant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the matters alleged in Paragraph 7 of the Notice and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`8.
`
`Applicant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the matters alleged in Paragraph 8 of the Notice and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`9.
`
`Applicant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the matters alleged in Paragraph 9 of the Notice and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`10.
`
`Applicant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the matters alleged in Paragraph 10 of the Notice and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`11.
`
`Applicant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the matters alleged in Paragraph 11 of the Notice and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`12.
`
`Applicant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
`
`of the matters alleged in Paragraph 12 of the Notice and, on that basis, denies them.
`
`13.
`
`14.
`
`15.
`
`16.
`
`17.
`
`18.
`
`19.
`
`20.
`
`21.
`
`22.
`
`23.
`
` Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 13 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 14 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 15 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 16 of the Notice.
`
` Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 17 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 18 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 19 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 20 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 21 of the Notice.
`
` Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 22 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 23 of the Notice.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Opposition No. 91250842
`
`24.
`
`25.
`
`26.
`
`27.
`
`28.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 24 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 25 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 26 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 27 of the Notice.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 28 of the Notice.
`
`AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
`
`Applicant undertakes the burden of proof only as to those defenses deemed affirmative
`
`defenses by law, regardless of how such defenses are denominated below. Applicant expressly
`
`reserves the right to plead additional affirmative and other defenses should any such defenses be
`
`revealed by discovery in this case. As and for its affirmative and other defenses, Applicant states
`
`as follows:
`
`First Affirmative Defense
`
`There is no likelihood of confusion, mistake or deception because Applicant’s Mark and
`
`Opposer’s alleged trademarks are not confusingly similar. No likelihood of confusion exists
`
`between the Applicant’s Mark and any of the alleged trademarks owned by Opposer (“Opposer’s
`
`Marks”) because of at least the following: Applicant’s Mark and Opposer’s Marks are dissimilar
`
`in overall appearance, aural impression, and connotation; the commercial impression of
`
`Applicant’s Mark and Opposer’s Marks are different; goods and services associated with
`
`Applicant’s Mark and Opposer’s Marks are different; and, the term “MEDICA” used in Opposer’s
`
`Marks is weak and entitled to narrow protection.
`
`
`
`WHEREFORE, Applicant respectfully requests that the notice of opposition be dismissed
`
`with prejudice, together with whatever other relief the Board may deem appropriate.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Opposition No. 91250842
`
`Dated: October 10, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The Plus IP Firm
`101 N.E. 3rd Ave., Suite 1500
`Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301
`(954) 332-3584
`
`By: s/Derek Fahey/
`Derek R. Fahey, Esq.
`Florida Bar Number: 0088194
`Email: derek@plusfirm.com
`Attorney for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a true and complete copy of the foregoing “Answer to Notice of
`
`Opposition” has been served on all counsel of record via email and ESTTA on October 10, 2019.
`
`
`
`
`
`By: s/Derek Fahey/
`Derek R. Fahey, Esq.
`
`4
`
`

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.

We are unable to display this document.

PTO Denying Access

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket