Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`ESTTA253682
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`12/08/2008
`
`Filing date:
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`92050138
`Defendant
`Firich Enterprises Co., Ltd.
`Steven M. Rabin
`Rabin & Berdo PC
`1101 14th Street, NW, Suite 500
`Washington, DC 20005-5633
`UNITED STATES
`Answer
`M. Scott Alprin
`firm@rabinberdo.com
`/M. Scott Alprin/
`12/08/2008
`Finders Express Computers v. Firich Enterprises - Answer - FinalPDF.pdf ( 4
`pages )(107692 bytes )
`
`Proceeding
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`Filer's Name
`Filer's e-mail
`Signature
`Date
`Attachments
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`----------------------------------------------------- )
`)
`FINDERS EXPRESS COMPUTERS, INC. )
` )
` Petitioner,
`
`)
`Cancellation No. 92050138
`)
`(opposing Reg. No. 3415288)
`)
`)
` )
`FIRICH ENTERPRISES CO., LTD.
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`
`
`
`Registrant.
`
`)
`)
`----------------------------------------------------- )
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`REGISTRANT’S ANSWER TO PETITION FOR CANCELLATION AND
`AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
`
`COMES NOW Firich Enterprises Co., Ltd. (“Registrant”), by and through
`
`
`
`counsel, and responds to the Petition for Cancellation filed by Finders Express
`
`Computers, Inc. (“Petitioner”) as follows, by responding to each paragraph of the said
`
`Petition, and by setting forth affirmative defenses. Any allegation in the Petition not
`
`specifically admitted herein is denied.
`
`
`
`Regarding the statements in the first paragraph regarding the Petitioner’s state of
`
`incorporation and address, Registrant lacks sufficient knowledge and information upon
`
`which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in the paragraph.
`
`
`
`Regarding the statements in the second paragraph regarding Petitioner’s
`
`ownership of Ser. No. 76/681,449, Registrant lacks sufficient knowledge and information
`
`upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in the paragraph.
`
`
`
`Regarding the statements in the third paragraph regarding Petitioner’s belief that
`
`it will be damaged, Registrant denies the allegation. Applicant admits that its address is
`
`Sijhih City, 10F., No. 75, Sec. 1, Sintai 5th Rd., Taipei County, Taiwan, and admits that
`
`its registration, Reg. No. 3415288, was registered on April 22, 2008.
`
`
`
`Regarding the fourth paragraph (including all of the grounds for the Petition),
`
`Registrant submits the following: Registrant denies that “date of use in commerce” is the
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`
`proper terminology to assert priority of use in commerce, if that is in fact the allegation
`
`that Petitioner is setting forth, and therefore lacks sufficient knowledge and information
`
`upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations, and therefore denies the
`
`same; Registrant denies that “infringement of intellectual copyrights” is a proper ground
`
`for a petition for cancellation at the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, and therefore
`
`lacks sufficient knowledge and information upon which to form a belief as to the truth of
`
`the allegations, and therefore denies the same; Registrant denies that “internet copyright
`
`violations and record creation” is a proper ground for a petition for cancellation at the
`
`Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, and therefore lacks sufficient knowledge and
`
`information upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations, and therefore
`
`denies the same.
`
`Regarding the statements in the fifth paragraph (at the bottom of the first page of
`
`the Petition) regarding Registrant’s lack of use of the FEC mark since 1998, Registrant
`
`denies the allegations. At the end of the paragraph, Petitioner states: ‘“. .
`
`. and not even
`
`on 4/6/05 referred to exhibit ‘Firich l(a)’ whois ‘firich.com (sic).” Registrant does not
`
`understand this statement, and therefore lacks sufficient knowledge and information upon
`
`which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations, and therefore denies the same.
`
`Regarding the statements in the sixth paragraph (at the top of page 2 of the
`
`Petition) regarding, inter alia, “Practice of Unfair methods” and “Google keyword search
`
`exhibits 1(a),” Applicant denies each and every allegation.
`
`Regarding the statements in the seventh paragraph regarding, inter alia, “Practice
`
`of Unfair methods” and “Google keyword search exhibits l(b),” Applicant denies each
`
`and every allegation.
`
`Regarding the statements in the eighth paragraph regarding, inter alia, “Practice
`
`of Unfair methods” and “whois domain registration by network solutions exhibits l(c),”
`
`Applicant denies each and every allegation.
`
`Regarding the statements in the ninth paragraph (at the bottom of page 2)
`
`regarding, inter alia, “Practice of Unfair methods” and “DATE OF USE OF THE MARK
`
`‘FEC’ as referred to exhibits 2(a),” Applicant denies each and every allegation.
`
`WHEREFORE, Registrant respectfully prays that Judgment be entered for
`
`Registrant and against Petitioner in this proceeding, that the Petition for Cancellation be
`
`

`
`dismissed, and that Registrant’s petitioned registration be allowed to continue existing on
`
`the Principal Register.
`
`Registrant will assert any affirmative defense or compulsory or permissive
`
`counterclaim that may be developed throughout discovery and testimony periods in this
`
`proceeding.
`
`AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
`
`1. Opposer is barred from the relief sought by the doctrine of unclean hands.
`
`2. Opposer is barred from the relief sought by the doctrine of estoppel.
`
`3. Opposer is barred from the relief sought by the doctrine of acquiescence.
`
`4. Opposer is barred from the relief sought by the doctrine of laches.
`
`5. Further investigation and discovery may reveal that Opposer fails to state a
`
`claim upon which relief may be granted.
`
`6. Further investigation and discovery may reveal that Opposer lacks standing
`
`upon which to oppose registration of Applicant’s Mark.
`
`Date:
`
`llgfgoi
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`FIRICH ENTERPRISES CO., LTD.
`
` Steven M. Rabi
`
`M. Scott Alpri
`Attorneys for Applicant/Petitioner
`RABIN & BERDO, P.C.
`Suite 500, 1101 14th Street, NW
`Washington, D.C. 20005
`Telephone: (202)371-8976
`Facsimile: (202)408-0924
`
`

`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a true and complete copy of the foregoing Answer has been served on the
`Petitioner by mailing said copy on December 9, 2008 via United States Postal Service First Class
`Mail, postage prepaid, to:
`
`Mr. Michael Delasse
`216 N Main
`
`Sand Springs, OK74063
`
`M. Scott Alpri