`
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`ESTTA1013707
`
`Filing date:
`
`11/06/2019
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Proceeding
`
`91251108
`
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Plaintiff
`Megaport (Services) Pty Ltd
`
`THEODORE R. REMAKLUS
`WOOD, HERRON & EVANS, L.L.P.
`441 VINE STREET 2700 CAREW TOWER
`CINCINNATI, OH 45202
`UNITED STATES
`tremaklus@whe-law.com
`5132412324
`
`Submission
`
`Filer's Name
`
`Filer's email
`
`Signature
`
`Date
`
`Motion for Default Judgment
`
`Theodore R. Remaklus
`
`tremaklus@whe-law.com
`
`/theodore r remaklus/
`
`11/06/2019
`
`Attachments
`
`Motion for entry of default judgment.pdf(98577 bytes )
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`____________________________________)
`Megaport (Services) Pty Ltd,
`
`) Opposition No. 91251108
` )
`
`
`
`
`Opposer,
`)
`) Application No. 88/298,872
`) Published: July 6, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`) Mark: GIGAPORT
`
`
`
`Gigafy, LLC,
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`Applicant.
`
`
`
`
`____________________________________)
`
`
`
`MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT
`
`
`
`
`
`Opposer, Megaport (Services) Pty Ltd ("Opposer"), moves the Board pursuant to
`
`37 C.F.R. §2.114(a) for entry of default judgment on the grounds that Applicant, Gigafy, LLC
`
`("Applicant"), has failed to file an answer within the time set by the Board. In support of its
`
`Motion, Opposer states:
`
`1.
`
`On September 23, 2019, Opposer filed a Notice of Opposition to U.S. Application
`
`No. 88/298,872 for the mark GIGAPORT for use in International Classes 9 and 42. The
`
`Opposition was filed on the basis of likelihood of confusion with Opposer's U.S. Registration
`
`Nos. 5148547, 5148579, 5193317, 5193324, 5206695, 5273259 and 5809663 for the mark
`
`MEGAPORT and other marks that include the term MEGAPORT in International Classes 38
`
`and/or 42.
`
`2.
`
`On September 23, 2019, the Board served the Notice of Opposition on Applicant
`
`and setting November 2, 2019, as the deadline for Applicant to file an answer to the Notice of
`
`Opposition.
`
`1
`
`
`
`3.
`
`As of the date of this Motion for Entry of Default Judgment, or November 6,
`
`2019, Applicant has neither filed an answer to the Notice of Opposition nor requested an
`
`extension of time to file such an answer.
`
`4.
`
`"[T]he standard for determining whether a default judgment should be entered
`
`against the defendant, for its failure to file a timely answer to the complaint, is the Fed. R. Civ. P.
`
`55(c) standard, which requires that the defendant show good cause why default judgment should
`
`not be entered against it." TTAB Manual of Procedure § 508.
`
`5.
`
`Because Applicant has failed to file an answer to the Notice of Opposition within
`
`the time permitted, default judgment should be granted to Opposer and an order sustaining the
`
`opposition to Classes 9 and 42 of U.S. Application No. 88/298,872.
`
`
`
`WHEREFORE, Megaport (Services) Pty Ltd respectfully requests that its Motion for
`
`Entry of Default Judgment be granted.
`
`Date: November 6, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Megaport (Services) Pty Ltd
`
`
` By: /s/ Theodore R. Remaklus
`Theodore R. Remaklus
`tremaklus@whe-law.com
`WOOD, HERRON & EVANS, L.L.P.
`2700 Carew Tower
`441 Vine Street
`Cincinnati, Ohio 45202-2917
`(513) 241-2324
`(513) 241-6234 (Facsimile)
`
`Attorneys for Opposer
`Megaport (Services) Pty Ltd
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion for Entry of
`
`
`
`Default Judgment has been served by electronic mail upon counsel for Applicant on this 6th
`
`day of November, 2019, on the following address:
`
`Joshua M. Gerben, Esq.
`Gerben Law Firm, PLLC
`1050 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 500
`Washington, D.C. 20036
`jgerben@gerbenlawfirm.com
`eperrott@gerbenlawfirm.com
`
` /s/ Theodore R. Remaklus
`Theodore R. Remaklus
`
`Attorney for Opposer
`Megaport (Services) Pty Ltd
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ ChargeStill Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.

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.

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