throbber
Proceeding no.
`
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`address
`
`Submission
`
`Filer's name
`
`Filer's email
`
`Signature
`
`Date
`
`Attachments
`
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`Filing date:
`
`ESTTA1364123
`06/10/2024
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`91283953
`
`Plaintiff
`Bump Health, Inc.
`
`JOHN T.D. BATHKE
`PHILLIPS & BATHKE, P.C.
`4541 NORTH PROSPECT ROAD
`SUITE 300A
`PEORIA HEIGHTS, IL 61616
`UNITED STATES
`Primary email: jtdb@pb-iplaw.com
`Secondary email(s): ip@pb-iplaw.com, jlap@pb-iplaw.com
`312-260-9160
`Other Motions/Submissions
`
`John T.D. Bathke
`
`jtdb@pb-iplaw.com
`
`/John T.D. Bathke/
`
`06/10/2024
`
`2024.06.10 Motion for Leave to File MSJ and Resume Proceedings.pdf(39832
`bytes )
`2024.06.10 MSJ re GLOW RECIPE Cancellation No 92082963.pdf(1938966
`bytes )
`Appendix 1-116.pdf(5870433 bytes )
`Appendix 117-167.pdf(3888927 bytes )
`Appendix 168-222.pdf(5547249 bytes )
`Appendix 223-274.pdf(4124339 bytes )
`Appendix 275-326.pdf(4126735 bytes )
`Appendix 327-377.pdf(2983360 bytes )
`Appendix 378-414.pdf(1789815 bytes )
`Appendix 415-476.pdf(880805 bytes )
`
`

`

`BEFORE THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`Bump Health, Inc.
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`Aramara Beauty LLC
`
`Registrant.
`
`
`
`
`
`Opposition No. 91283953
`Opposition No. 91289012
`Cancellation No. 92082963
`
`Motion for Leave to File Motion for Summary Judgment and to Resume
`Proceedings for the Purpose of Having this Motion Heard
`in Cancellation No. 92082963
`
`Bump Health, Inc. (“Bump”), through counsel, moves this Board for leave to
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`file the attached Motion for Summary Judgment and Appendix concerning
`
`Cancellation Proceeding Number 92082963. Bump further moves this Board to
`
`resume proceedings to have this Motion heard.
`
` On June 5, 2024, this Board consolidated the parties’ pending proceedings
`
`and then suspended these consolidated proceedings pending the resolution
`
`of Aramara Beauty LLC’s (“Aramara”) filed lawsuit against Bump. (25 TTABVUE).
`
`One of those cases consolidated and suspended was Cancellation Number
`
`92082963. This cancellation proceeding concerns the abandonment of
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Aramara’s GLOW RECIPE registered mark in class 03, which is one of the
`
`registrations relied upon in Aramara’s lawsuit against Bump. (21 TTABVUE Ex.
`
`Compl ¶10)
`
`
`
`Before Aramara’s Motion to Suspend was granted, Bump was already
`
`preparing the attached Motion for Summary Judgment. That is because during
`
`a meet and confer, Aramara informed Bump that it was not withholding any
`
`documents responsive to Bump’s requests and that Aramara did not
`
`anticipate producing further documents in the case, which Bump confirmed in
`
`writing. (Petitioner’s Appendix to Motion for Summary Judgment A475). Based
`
`on those documents, Bump’s Petition to Cancel Aramara’s Registration No.
`
`475529 should be granted, and the Registration cancelled on the grounds of
`
`abandonment under 15 U.S.C. § 1127. The Board has the inherent power to
`
`schedule the disposition of cases on its docket and therefore has the power to
`
`resume this matter at this time. T.B.M.P. 510.01.
`
`
`
`Therefore, Bump seeks leave to file this Motion and asks this Board to resume
`
`the proceedings to have it heard. In the interest of justice, this Motion should be
`
`heard. Bump is also filing a Motion to Suspend Aramara’s federal lawsuit
`
`against Bump and will report to the Board the ruling on this Motion.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`WHEREFORE, Bump respectfully requests that the Board grant Bump leave to file
`
`the attached Motion for Summary Judgment and Appendix and requests that
`
`this Board resume proceedings for the purpose of having this Motion heard.
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`Bump Health, Inc., by
`
`
`/jtdb/
`John T.D. Bathke
`PHILLIPS & BATHKE, P.C.
`53 West Jackson Boulevard
`Suite 805
`Chicago, Illinois 60604
`312 260 9160
`jtdb@pb-iplaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that this document was was served upon
`Registrant’s counsel of record on June 10, 2024, by sending a copy by e-mail to
`the following:
`
`Matthew A. Homyk
`Blank Rome LLP
`matthew.homyk@blankrome.com
`samar.aryani@blankrome.com,
`docketing@blankrome.com
`
`
`
`
`/jtdb/
`John T.D. Bathke
`Phillips & Bathke, P.C.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`BEFORE THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`In re Registration of Aramara Beauty LLC
`Reg No. 4755299
`For the mark: GLOW RECIPE
`Filed: October 22, 2014
`Registered: June 16, 2015
`
`
`Bump Health, Inc.
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`Aramara Beauty LLC
`
`Registrant.
`
`
`
`
`
`Cancellation No. 92082963
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner Bump Health, Inc.’s
`Motion for Summary Judgment
`
`Petitioner, Bump Health, Inc. (“Bump”), through counsel, brings this motion
`
`for summary judgment under Federal Rule Civil Procedure 56 seeking the
`
`cancellation of Aramara Beauty LLC’s (“Aramara”) U.S. Trademark Registration
`
`4755299 on the grounds that Aramara abandoned its registered GLOW RECIPE
`
`mark.
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Relevant Factual and Procedural History
`
`Bump owns the trademark GLOW ORGANICS, which it uses in connection
`
`with a line of organic skin care products formulated for pregnancy. (Petitioner’s
`
`Appendix A468-69)(13 TTABVUE Ex. Compl ¶8).1 Bump’s U.S. Trademark
`
`Registration 5257987 for GLOW ORGANICS is for organic cosmetics; non-
`
`medicated, organic skin care preparations in class 03, which was first filed as
`
`an intent to use application on September 21, 2016. (A458-74).
`
`Aramara owns U.S. Trademark Registration 4755299 for GLOW RECIPE, which
`
`identifies the follow class 03 goods: body and beauty care cosmetics; make-
`
`up; non-medicated skin care preparations (“Registration”). (A042). This case
`
`concerns this Registration and Aramara’s non-use of the GLOW RECIPE
`
`trademark in class 03 from the launch of its e-retail site in 2014 to at least as
`
`late as 2017.
`
`A. Aramara and its Glow Recipe e-commerce site
`
`
`
`In 2014, Aramara launched Glow Recipe, a K-beauty e-commerce site which
`
`at the time of its launch sold seven different Korean beauty brands e.g. brands
`
`
`1 Citations to TTABVUE are for those documents filed in Cancellation Proceeding No.
`92082963
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`such as Goodal and Dr. Oracle. (A068-69).2 The ultimate goal of Glow Recipe’s
`
`co-founders was to, “… increase awareness of Korean beauty products here in
`
`the U.S. and help more brands crack the market.” (A070).
`
`B. Aramara’s trademark filings for GLOW RECIPE in class 03
`
` On October 22, 2014, Aramara filed a U.S. trademark application for GLOW
`
`RECIPE under Section 1(a) of the Lanham Act (“Application”). (A055). This
`
`Application, however, was not for online retail store services. (A055). Rather, the
`
`Application identified the following goods in class 03: body and beauty care
`
`cosmetics; make-up; non-medicated skin care preparations. (A055). With this
`
`Application, Aramara submitted a specimen of use, which shows the website
`
`glowrecipe.com with the following logo
`
` and a banner with GLOW
`
`RECIPE SKINCARE within it. (A061).
`
`
`2 In the articles submitted by Aramara, Glow Recipe is referred to as an e-tailer
`(A099, 359), an ”e-commerce destination” (A072, 180), an “e-commerce site” (A214,
`277), and an “online destination for natural K-beauty exports” (A344).
`3
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`But the products visible in the specimen are third party branded products.
`
`(A061). According to the Application, Aramara began using GLOW RECIPE to sell
`
`its class 03 goods as early as July 1, 2014. (A056). Aramara’s Application was
`
`accepted by the U.S. Trademark Office; the GLOW RECIPE mark was published
`
`and then registered on June 16, 2015 (“Registraton”). (A042; A064).
`
` On January 5, 2016, Aramara filed another trademark application for the
`
`logo
`
` for body and beauty care cosmetics in class 03. The first
`
`specimen Aramara submitted with this application showed the logo on
`
`Aramara’s website:
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`
`
`(A425-26). The examiner rejected this specimen because it was merely
`
`advertising material and therefore did not show use in commerce for the class
`
`03 goods identified. (A443-45).
`
`
`
`In response, Aramara submitted the following substitute specimen:
`
`
`
`(A440). Again, the USPTO rejected this specimen; this time, the specimen
`
`appeared to be digitally created or altered. (A428-30). Aramara then
`
`abandoned this application; the Notice of Abandonment was sent on January
`
`30, 2017. (A427).
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`C. Aramara does not sell its own goods until 2017
`
` Although Aramara stated in its GLOW RECIPE Application that it first used
`
`GLOW RECIPE in 2014 to offer for sale the class 03 goods identified therein, it was
`
`not until as late as May 2017 that Aramara started offering for sale GLOW RECIPE
`
`braded goods, specifically a “Watermelon Glow Sleeping Mask” and “Blueberry
`
`Bounce Gentle Cleanser”. (A 276-77, 302-03, 309). No other GLOW RECIPE
`
`branded class 03 goods were offered within three years after the Application
`
`filing date. (A038-414). Notably, none of the documents produced by Aramara
`
`show Aramara offering for sale GLOW RECIPE branded make-up in 2014, 2015,
`
`2016, 2017, or 2018. (A038-414). Aramara also does not have written business or
`
`marketing plans concerning the GLOW RECIPE mark and the sale of body and
`
`beauty care cosmetics; make-up; non-medicated skin care preparations from
`
`2014 to present. (A022)
`
`
`
`Bump filed its Petition to Cancel the GLOW RECIPE registration on August 8,
`
`2023. (1 TTABVUE). Pretrial disclosures were exchanged, and discovery
`
`commenced. During the discovery process, Bump sought documents that
`
`Aramara contends show use of its GLOW RECIPE mark on body and beauty care
`
`cosmetics; make-up; non-medicated skin care preparations in International
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Class 03 for each year from 2014 to 2018. (A001 -035). Aramara responded with
`
`fifty-eight documents. (A038 - 414).3 During the parties meet and confer in
`
`March 2024, Aramara informed Bump that it was not withholding documents
`
`responsive to Bump’s Requests for Production, and Aramara did not anticipate
`
`producing any further documents in this case; Bump confirmed this in writing.
`
`(A475-76). This Motion follows.
`
`Standard
`
`
`
`The Board can consider any motion available under the Federal Rules of Civil
`
`Procedure. 37 C.F.R. § 2.116(a). This includes motions for summary judgment.
`
`T.B.M.P. § 528; Fed. R. Civ. P. 56.
`
` Motions for summary judgment are pretrial devices to dispose of cases in
`
`which "the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material
`
`fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." T.B.M.P. § 528.01
`
`(citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 56). Such motions avoid unnecessary trials. Id. The movant
`
`bears the burden of establishing there is no genuine dispute as to material
`
`facts. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986); Corporate Document
`
`
`3 Aramara labeled the .pdf and image files sent to Bump with “R# – (Aramara’s title
`for the document)”. Bump has included these titles in the Appendix as separate
`pages separating the documents produced.
`7
`
`
`
`

`

`Services Inc. v. I.C.E.D. Management Inc., 48 U.S.P.Q.2d 1477, 1479 (TTAB 1998).
`
`Evidence is viewed in favor of the non-movant and justifiable inferences are
`
`drawn in the non-movant’s favor. See Lloyd's Food Products Inc. v. Eli's Inc., 25
`
`U.S.P.Q.2d 2027, 2028-29 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Factual disputes are genuine only
`
`when a reasonable finder of fact could resolve the matter in favor of the non-
`
`moving party. See Opryland USA Inc. v. Great American Music Show Inc., 23
`
`U.S.P.Q.2d 1471, 1472-73 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
`
`Argument
`
` Aramara’s Registration should be cancelled on
`
`the grounds of
`
`abandonment (15 U.S.C. §1127) based on the evidence produced in discovery.
`
`Bump’s Motion for Summary Judgment should therefore be granted.
`
`I.
`
`Bump has standing to petition the cancellation of Aramara’s GLOW
`RECIPE Registration.
`
`Bump has standing to petition the cancellation of Aramara’s GLOW RECIPE
`
`Registration. Standing is a threshold issue that must be proved in every inter
`
`partes case. ShutEmDown Sports, Inc. v. Lacy, 102 USPQ2d 1036, 1041 (T.T.A.B.
`
`2012). To establish standing in a cancellation proceeding, petitioner must show
`
`both "a real interest" in the proceedings as well as a "reasonable" basis for its
`
`belief of damage. Id.
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Here, Bump owns U.S. Trademark Registration 5257987 for GLOW ORGANICS
`
`in class 03, which has a priority date of September 21, 2016. And Bump has
`
`challenged Aramara’s recent applications for its GLOW marks in class 03; those
`
`proceedings are now consolidated with this case. (17 TTABVUE). To support the
`
`contention that Aramara can apply for and register a variety of GLOW
`
`trademarks, Aramara relies on its GLOW RECIPE Registration. (4 TTABVUE
`
`¶7)(admission of allegation in Petition – 1 TTABVUE ¶7). And now, Aramara has
`
`brought an infringement lawsuit against Bump asserting this GLOW RECIPE
`
`Registration. (13 TTABVUE). But based on the evidence presented in this case,
`
`Bump has priority over Aramara’s use of GLOW RECIPE in class 03: Bump has a
`
`priority date of September 21, 2016 and Aramara did not use its GLOW RECIPE
`
`mark on class 03 goods until as late as May 2017.
`
`As a result, Bump not only has a real interest in this cancellation proceeding
`
`but a more than reasonable belief of damage based on Aramara‘s conduct.
`
`Bump therefore has standing to petition the cancellation of Aramara’s
`
`Registration.
`
`II.
`
`Aramara’s Registration should be cancelled because the GLOW
`RECIPE registered mark was abandoned for those goods identified
`in the Registration
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

` Aramara’s Registration should be cancelled on
`
`the grounds of
`
`abandonment based on the evidence obtained through discovery. A mark is
`
`deemed abandoned when its use has been discontinued with intent not to
`
`resume use. 15 U.S.C. §1127.
`
`
`
`The registrant’s
`
`intent not to resume use may be
`
`inferred from
`
`circumstances. Id. And “use” of a mark means the bona fide use of such mark
`
`made in the ordinary course of trade, and not made merely to reserve a right
`
`in a mark. Id. A mark is used in connection with goods when a) it is placed in
`
`any manner on the goods or their containers or the displays associated
`
`therewith or on the tags or labels affixed thereto, or if the nature of the goods
`
`makes such placement impracticable, then on documents associated with the
`
`goods or their sale, and b) the goods are sold or transported in commerce. Id.
`
`Factors to consider in determining whether there is bona fide use, are (1) the
`
`amount of use; (2) the nature or quality of the transaction; and (3) what is
`
`typical use within a particular industry. Automedx Inc. v. Artivent Corp., 95
`
`USPQ2d 1976 (TTAB 2010); see In SaddleSprings v. Mad Croc Brands, Inc., 2017
`
`TTAB LEXIS 430, *42 (TTAB Nov. 8, 2017) (the sale of others’, unrelated third-
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`parties, cocktails was not sufficient to support a registration for a variety of
`
`alcoholic beverages)(non-precedential).
`
`
`
`The registrant’s nonuse of its mark for 3 consecutive years shall be prima
`
`facie evidence of abandonment. 15 U.S.C. §1127. Because registrations are
`
`presumed valid, the filing date of the application claiming use of the registered
`
`mark begins the three-year period. ShutEmDown Sports, Inc., 102 USPQ2D at
`
`1042. If the petitioner can show three consecutive years of nonuse, it has
`
`established a prima facie showing of abandonment, creating a rebuttable
`
`presumption that the registrant has abandoned the mark without intent to
`
`resume use. Id. The burden of production, i.e., going forward, then shifts to the
`
`registrant to produce evidence that it has either used the mark, or intended to
`
`resume use. Id. The burden of persuasion remains with the plaintiff to prove
`
`abandonment by a preponderance of the evidence. Id.
`
` Overall, abandonment must be proved by a preponderance of the
`
`evidence, and the petitioner bears the burden of persuasion even if a statutory
`
`prima facie case of abandonment has been established. Yazhong Investing
`
`Ltd. v. Multi-Media Tech. Ventures, Ltd. , 126 USPQ2d 1526, 1532 (T.T.A.B. 2018).
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Abandonment is a question of fact. Id. Any inferences drawn must be based
`
`on proven fact. Id. a 1533.
`
`
`
`Based on the evidence presented in discovery, Aramara abandoned it’s
`
`GLOW RECIPE registered mark. Aramara did not use its GLOW RECIPE mark on
`
`make-up from the 2014 filing date of its Application for at least three years
`
`afterwards. And Aramara has not produced sufficient evidence to establish
`
`that it either used the GLOW RECIPE mark on these goods or intended to
`
`“resume”4 use of the mark during this time.
`
` Aramara also did not use its GLOW RECIPE mark on the remaining class 03
`
`goods from the 2014 filing date of its GLOW RECIPE Application until as late as
`
`May 2017. Although this period of non-use is just shy of three years, the facts
`
`show that Aramara did not have an intent to “resume” use of the GLOW RECIPE
`
`mark at the time the Application was filed. As a result, Bump’s Motion for
`
`Summary Judgment should be granted and the Registration cancelled.
`
`
`
`
`4 Based on the evidence provided in discovery, when Aramara launched its e-retail
`business in 2014 and filed the Application, it was not using its GLOW RECIPE mark to
`offer any of the class 03 goods identified in the Regisration, and therefore it could not
`literally resume use of a mark that was never in use.
`12
`
`
`
`

`

`A. Aramara abandoned its GLOW RECIPE registered mark for make-up
`because it neither was using nor intended to resume use of the mark as
`of the filing date of its Application, and there is no evidence of use within
`three years of this filing date.
`
`
` Aramara abandoned its GLOW RECIPE registered mark for make-up
`
`because it neither was using nor intended to resume use of the mark at the
`
`time it filed its Application, and there is no evidence of use within three years of
`
`that filing date. Again, a party’s nonuse of its mark for 3 consecutive years shall
`
`be prima facie evidence of abandonment. 15 U.S.C. 15 U.S.C. §1127. And when a
`
`prima facie case is made, it is the registrant who must produce evidence to
`
`demonstrate an intent to use the mark. ShutEmDown Sports, Inc, 102 USPQ2D at
`
`1042.
`
` Here, Aramara was not offering for sale GLOW RECIPE make-up when it filed
`
`its GLOW RECIPE Application. There is also no evidence that Aramara offered for
`
`sale GLOW RECIPE make-up within three years of the Application filing date.
`
`Aramara has also not produced any evidence demonstrating an intent to start
`
`using GLOW RECIPE to sell make-up during this time. Instead, the evidence
`
`shows that Aramara only intended to use GLOW RECIPE to offer e-retailer
`
`services selling third party branded products.
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

` As a result, Bump has made a prima facie showing of abandonment with
`
`respect to make-up. And given that Aramara has not produced evidence
`
`sufficient to show use or an intent to use GLOW RECIPE on make-up within three
`
`years from the 2014 filing date, Bump’s abandonment claim must prevail. Bump
`
`therefore requests that Bumps’ Motion be granted, and the Registration
`
`cancelled.
`
`B. Aramara abandoned its GLOW RECIPE registered mark for body and
`beauty care cosmetics and non-medicated skin care preparations
`because it neither was using nor intended to resume use of the mark as
`of the filing date of its Application based on the circumstances.
`
` Aramara abandoned its GLOW RECIPE registered mark for body and beauty
`
`care cosmetics and non-medicated skin care preparations because it neither
`
`was using nor intended to resume use of the mark at the time it filed its
`
`Application. Again, a mark is deemed abandoned when its use has been
`
`discontinued with intent not to resume use. 15 U.S.C. §1127. And “intent not to
`
`resume use” may be inferred from circumstances. 15 U.S.C. §1127.
`
` At the time of filing its Application for its Registration, Aramara was not using
`
`GLOW RECIPE on those goods identified in the Registration; rather Aramara was
`
`an e-retailer selling third party branded goods. There is no written business
`
`plan or marketing plan that evidences Aramara’s intent to sell GLOW RECIPE
`14
`
`
`
`

`

`branded goods. There are also no documents that evidence an intent to
`
`“resume” use of the mark to offer for sale the registered goods for the years
`
`2014, 2015, or 2016. In fact, in 2016, Aramara abandoned its subsequent
`
`trademark application for the GLOW RECIPE logo (the same logo in the
`
`specimen for the Registration) for body and beauty care cosmetics. Notably,
`
`Aramara did not amend this application to an intent to use application but
`
`instead submitted what appears to be a digitally altered specimen before
`
`abandoning the application.
`
`
`
`Based on the evidence presented during discovery, Aramara only intended
`
`to offer e-retailer services when it filed its Application for the Registration. And
`
`even though there is the legal presumption that Aramara was using the GLOW
`
`RECIPE mark as of the time Aramara filed its Application, based on the evidence,
`
`the day after that filing date, Aramara discontinued its presumed use of the
`
`GLOW RECIPE mark for the class 03 registered goods without an intent to
`
`“resume” use of the GLOW RECIPE mark for these goods. The registered mark
`
`was therefore abandoned, and Aramara should not be entitled to its
`
`Registration and all the statutory benefits resulting therefrom. As a result,
`
`Bump’s Motion should be granted and Aramara’s Registration cancelled.
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`Conclusion
`
`For the reasons stated above, Bump Health, Inc.’s Motion for Summary
`
`
`
`Judgment should be granted and Aramara Beauty LLC’s U.S. Trademark
`
`Registration 4755299 should be cancelled because the registered mark was
`
`abandoned under 15 U.S.C. §1127.
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`Bump Health, Inc., by
`
`
`/jtdb/
`John T.D. Bathke
`PHILLIPS & BATHKE, P.C.
`53 West Jackson Boulevard
`Suite 805
`Chicago, Illinois 60604
`312 260 9160
`jtdb@pb-iplaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that this Motion for Summary Judgment
`along with the Appendix was was served upon Registrant’s counsel of record
`on June 10, 2024, by sending a copy by e-mail to the following:
`
`Matthew A. Homyk
`Blank Rome LLP
`matthew.homyk@blankrome.com
`samar.aryani@blankrome.com,
`docketing@blankrome.com
`
`
`
`
`/jtdb/
`John T.D. Bathke
`Phillips & Bathke, P.C.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`

`BEFORE THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`In re Registration of Aramara Beauty LLC
`Reg No. 4755299
`For the mark: GLOW RECIPE
`Filed: October 22, 2014
`Registered: June 16, 2015
`
`
`Bump Health, Inc.
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`Aramara Beauty LLC
`
`Registrant.
`
`
`
`
`
`Cancellation No. 92082963
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petition
`e  e
`to Motion for Summary Judgment
`
`
`No.
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`
`D
`
e
`REGISTRANT’S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO
`PETITIONER’S REVISED FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR
`PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND THINGS
`
`R-0001 - USPTO Specimen of Use 2014 GLOW RECIPE
`
`R-0002 -GLOW RECIPE Cert of Reg
`
`R-0003 - GLOW RECIPE Section 8and15 Specimen
`
`R-00004 - GLOW RECIPE Notice of Acceptance of 8and15
`
`Page
`
`
`A 038
`
`A 041
`
`A 044
`
`A 052
`
`1
`
`

`

`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`R-00005 - GLOW RECIPE Trademark Application
`
`R-00006 - GLOW RECIPE Notice of Publication
`
`R-00007 - CONFIDENTIAL AEO - Registrant Employee List
`
`R-00008 - 2014 Fashionista Article
`
`R-00009 - 2015 Bustle Article
`
`R-00010 - 2015 Allure Article
`
`R-00011 - 2015 Glamour Article
`
`R-00012 - 2015 Allure Article (#2)
`
`R-00013 - 2015 Teen Vogue Article
`
`R-00014 - 2015 Bustle Article
`
`R-00015 - 2015 Fashionista Article
`
`R-00016 - 2015 Allure Article (#3)
`
`R-00017 - 2015 Entrepreneur Article
`
`R-00018 - 2016 Korea Joongang Daily Article
`
`R-00019 - 2016 South China Morning Post Article
`
`R-00020 - 2016 W Mag Article
`
`R-00021 - 2016 Racked Article
`
`R-00022 - 2016 Style Caster Article
`
`A 054
`
`A 063
`
`A 065
`
`A 067
`
`A 071
`
`A 085
`
`A 092
`
`A 106
`
`A 112
`
`A 117
`
`A 129
`
`A 135
`
`A 141
`
`A 157
`
`A 168
`
`A 179
`
`A 185
`
`A 193
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`31
`
`32
`
`33
`
`34
`
`35
`
`36
`
`37
`
`38
`
`39
`
`40
`
`41
`
`R-00023 - 2016 Fashionista Article
`
`R-00024 - 2016 Vogue Article
`
`R-00025 - 2016 BBC Article
`
`R-00026 - 2016 Teen Vogue
`
`R-00027 - 2016 Marie Claire Article
`
`R-00028 - 2016 NBC Article
`
`R-00029 - 2017 Glamour Article
`
`R-00030 - 2017 WWD Article
`
`R-00031 - 2017 WWD Article (#2)
`
`R-00032 - 2017 Allure Article
`
`R-00033 - 2017 Allure Article (#2)
`
`R-00034 - 2017 Racked Article
`
`R-00035 - 2017 W Mag Article
`
`R-00036 – 2017 Well and Good Article
`
`R-00037 - 2017 Vogue Article
`
`R-00038 - 2017 The Cut Article
`
`R-00039 - CONFIDENTIAL AEO - 2014 to 2017 Financials
`
`R-00040 - CONFIDENTIAL AEO - Email Policy
`
`
`
`3
`
`A 210
`
`A 215
`
`A 223
`
`A 234
`
`A 246
`
`A 259
`
`A 268
`
`A 275
`
`A 280
`
`A 286
`
`A 299
`
`A 307
`
`A 311
`
`A 327
`
`A 342
`
`A 356
`
`A 370
`
`A 373
`
`

`

`42
`
`43
`
`44
`
`45
`
`46
`
`47
`
`48
`
`49
`
`50
`
`51
`
`52
`
`53
`
`54
`
`55
`
`56
`
`57
`
`58
`
`59
`
`R-00041 - CONFIDENTIAL AEO - PR Agency
`
`R-00042 - Magazine Article
`
`R-00043 - 2015 Facebook Post re Magazine Article
`
`R-00044 - 2015 Facebook Post of Products
`
`R-00045 - Photo of Products
`
`R-00046 - 2017 IG Post
`
`R-00047 - 2017 IG Post
`
`R-00048 - 2016 IG Post
`
`R-00049 - 2016 IG Post
`
`R-00050 - 2014 IG Post
`
`R-00051 - 2014 IG Post
`
`R-00052 - 2014 IG Post
`
`R-00053 - 2014 IG Post
`
`R-00054 - 2014 IG Post
`
`R-00055 - 2014 IG Post
`
`R-00056 - 2016 IG Post
`
`R-00057 - 2016 IG Post
`
`R-00058 - 2014 IG Post
`
`
`
`4
`
`A 378
`
`A 381
`
`A 383
`
`A 385
`
`A 387
`
`A 389
`
`A 391
`
`A 393
`
`A 395
`
`A 397
`
`A 399
`
`A 401
`
`A 403
`
`A 405
`
`A 407
`
`A 409
`
`A 411
`
`A 413
`
`

`

`60
`
`61
`
`62
`
`63
`
`REGISTRANT’S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES TO PETITIONER’S
`FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES
`
`U.S. Trademark Application Ser. No. 86865208 – GLOW
`RECIPE logo TSDR Status & Documents
`
`U.S. Trademark Registration No. 5257987 TSDR Status &
`Documents
`
`Email Correspondence Regarding Document Production
`
`
`A415
`
`A425
`
`A458
`
`A475
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`Bump Health, Inc., by
`
`
`/jtdb/
`John T.D. Bathke
`PHILLIPS & BATHKE, P.C.
`53 West Jackson Boulevard
`Suite 805
`Chicago, Illinois 60604
`312 260 9160
`jtdb@pb-iplaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Bump Health, Inc.,
`
`
`Petitioner,
`
`
`v.
`
`
`Aramara Beauty, LLC,
`
`
`Registrant.
`
`
`Cancellation No. 92082963
`
`Registration No. 4755299
`
`Registration Date: June 16, 2015
`
`Mark: GLOW RECIPE
`
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`
`REGISTRANT’S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO PETITIONER’S REVISED
`FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND THINGS
`
`Pursuant to Rule 34 and 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Registrant Aramara
`
`
`
`
`Beauty, LLC d/b/a Glow Recipe (“Registrant”), by and through its attorneys, Blank Rome LLP, hereby
`
`responds to Petitioner Bump Health, Inc.’s (“Petitioner”) Revised First Set of Requests for Production
`
`of Documents and Things.
`
`PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
`
`These responses to Petitioner’s Requests are based upon discovery and investigation conducted
`
`to date. Registrant expressly reserves the right to supplement these responses with and/or introduce at
`
`trial, evidence and documents not identified at this time which are subsequently discovered and/or the
`
`relevance of which is subsequently ascertained. Based on, subject to and without waiving the
`
`foregoing, Registrant makes the objections and responses discussed below.
`
`GENERAL OBJECTIONS
`
`These following objections are incorporated into each and every response to the Requests:
`
`1.
`
`Registrant objects to each Request to the extent it seeks information protected from
`
`disclosure by the attorney-client privilege, the work-product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege,
`
`rule, immunity, protection, or restriction that makes such information non-discoverable. Any
`
`inadvertent disclosure or production of such material shall not be deemed a waiver of the applicable
`
`- 1 -
`
`A001
`
`

`

`privilege or protection and Registrant reserves the right to demand the return of all copies of any such
`
`privileged or protected materials.
`
`2.
`
`Registrant objects to each Request to the extent that it seeks information that contains
`
`trade secrets, confidential commercial, business, financial, proprietary or competitively sensitive
`
`information or is otherwise protected by a right of privacy belonging to Registrant.
`
`3.
`
`Registrant objects to each Request to the extent that it seeks information protected by
`
`a third-party right of practice or maintained in confidence or subject to a contractual, statutory, or other
`
`limitation on disclosure, including without limitation information protected by confidentiality laws and
`
`regulations.
`
`4.
`
`Registrant objects to each Request on the grounds that it is, or to the extent it is, vague
`
`and ambiguous, overly broad, duplicative, or seeks information already in the Petitioner’s possession,
`
`custody or control, or to which the Petitioner has equal or greater access.
`
`5.
`
`Registrant objects to each Request to the extent that it is not expressly limited by time
`
`or geography. Unless otherwise stated, Registrant will interpret the scope of each Request as being
`
`limited to the United States.
`
`6.
`
`Registrant objects to each Request on the grounds that it seeks information that is
`
`neither relevant to the claims and defenses of either party nor reasonably calculated to lead to the
`
`discovery of admissible evidence.
`
`7.
`
`Registrant objects to each Request to the extent it is not proportional to the needs of
`
`the dispute and does not designate documents specifically or describe categories of documents with
`
`reasonable particularity.
`
`8.
`
`Registrant objects to each Request to the extent it seeks premature disclosure of expert
`
`testimony or evidence in Petitioner’s possession, custody or control or equally available to Petitioner.
`
`- 2 -
`
`A002
`
`

`

`9.
`
`Registrant objects to each Request on the grounds that Petitioner has not made a
`
`complete document production in response to Registrant’s requests. Registrant will produce
`
`documents after receipt of Petitioner’s document production.
`
`10.
`
`Registrant expressly reserves its right to supplement or amend these responses, or any
`
`of the various responses contained herein, in the future should Registrant discover additional
`
`information that may be responsive to the Requests.
`
`11.
`
`Nothing contained herein shall obligate or commit Registrant to supplement or amend
`
`these responses, or any of the various responses contained herein.
`
`12.
`
`Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Preliminary Statement and General
`
`Objections, Registrant makes the following specific objections and responses to the Requests:
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1:
`
`SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS
`
`All documents and things sufficient to evidence Your first use of the GLOW RECIPE mark
`
`in the U.S. in connection with body and beauty care cosmetics.
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1:
`
`
`
`Registrant incorporates by reference each of its General Objections, including as supported by
`
`the facts asserted in this response. Registrant further objects to this Request on grounds that it is overly
`
`broad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to the needs of this case. Registrant further objects
`
`to this Request on the grounds that it seeks documentation that is publicly available and equally
`
`accessible to Petitioner. Based on, subject to, and without waiving the foregoing objections, Registrant
`
`responds to this Request as follows: Registrant will produce documentation showing its first use of the
`
`GLOW RECIPE mark in the U.S. in connection with body and beauty care cosmetics. Registrant may
`
`- 3 -
`
`A003
`
`

`

`produce additional responsive documents to the extent that they exist after conducting a reasonable
`
`search and inquiry.
`
`REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2:
`
`
`
`All documents and things sufficient to evidence Your first use of the GLOW RECIPE mark
`
`in connection with make-up.
`
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2:
`
`
`
`Registrant incorporates by reference each of its General Objections, including as supported by
`
`the facts asse

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

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

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still 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.

throbber

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.

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.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket