Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`ESTTA465975
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`04/09/2012
`
`Filing date:
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`92051197
`Defendant
`Ecuabeverage Corp.
`EDWIN D SCHINDLER
`4 HIGH OAKS COURT, PO BOX 4259
`HUNTINGTON, NY 11743-0777
`UNITED STATES
`EDSchindler@att.net, edschindler@optonline.net
`Other Motions/Papers
`Edwin D. Schindler
`EDSchindler@att.net, edschindler@optonline.net, EdwinSchindler@gmail.com,
`EdwinSchindler@yahoo.com
`/Edwin D. Schindler/
`04/09/2012
`Ecuabeverage's Motion to Dismiss Cancellation for Lack of Prosecution in TTAB
`(4-9-2012).PDF ( 62 pages )(2909726 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 BOARI)
`
`ROYAL SIGNATURE, INC.
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ECUABEVERAGE CORPORATION,
`
`Respondent.
`
`ECUABEVERAGE CORPORATION,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`BROOKLYN BOTTLING OF MILTON,
`NEW YORK, rNC.,
`
`Respondent.
`
`ECUABEVERAGE CORPORATION,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`BROOKLYN BOTTLING OF MILTON,
`NEW YORK, INC.,
`
`Respondent.
`
`Cancellation No. 920 51197
`
`Cancellation No. 92051242
`
`Cancellation No. 92051263
`
`RESPONDENT ECUABEVERAGE CORPORATION'S MOTION TO DISMISS
`CANCELLATION NO. 92051197 FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION
`IN VIEW OF FINAL DISPOSITION IN CIVIL ACTION
`
`

`
`I. Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution
`
`Respondent Ecuabeverage Corporation ("Ecuabeverage") hereby respectfully
`
`moves for the dismissal of Cancellation No. 920 51197 , commenced by Petitioner Royal
`
`Signature, Inc., in view of, and consistent with, the Judgment ("Exhibit l") rendered by
`
`the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in Brookbtn Bottling qf
`
`Milton, New York, Inc. v. Ecuabeverage Corporation, Civil Action No. 07-cv-08483
`
`(AKH), entered March 6,2012, in which the District Court dismissed the Amended
`
`Complaint of Brooklyn Bottling of Milton, New York, Inc. ("Brooklyn Bottling") for
`
`lack of prosecution. Respondent Royal Signature, Inc. ("RSI"), a privy of Brooklyn
`Bottling, had agreed, in writing ("Exhibit2"), "to be bound by the decision" rendered in
`
`the civil action.
`
`If Baloru S.A. ("Baloru") is permitted to now substitute for RSI as the petitioner
`
`in this cancellation proceeding, as RSI's Motion to Call Up Consolidated Case for Action
`
`Due to Final Disposition of the Civil Action (served Marsh 2l,2012,via first class mail)
`
`seeks to do, then Balrou is likewise bound by the Judgment inthe civil litigation by virtue
`
`of its Assignment of U.S. Trademark Registration No. I ,474,395 (the trademark-at-issue
`
`in the civil action) from Brooklyn Bottling, dated April 29,2012, and included with
`
`RSI's motion.
`
`The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ("T.T.A.8.") suspended proceedings in
`
`Cancellation No. 92051197, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. $2.117, pending final disposition of
`
`the civil action. Because the civil action was dismissed for lack of prosecution, consistent
`with the District Court's final judgment, the "suspended" status of this cancellation pro-
`
`-1-
`
`

`
`ceeding now represents a period during which RSI and Baloru (by virtue of both entities
`
`being privies of Brooklyn Bottling), likewise, failed to diligently prosecute this cancel-
`
`lation action against Ecuabeverage.
`The District Court dismissed Brooklyn Bottling's Amended Complaint "without
`
`prejudice," nevertheless neither Brookl)rn Bottling nor its privies can successfully re-file
`
`a new civil action aeainst Ecuabeverage in federal district court due to defense of laches
`
`and acquiescence now available to Ecuabeverage. The nominal dismissal of Brooklyn
`Bottling's action by the District Court "without prejudice" does not permit Brooklyn
`
`Bottling (or its privies) to avoid Ecuabeverage's time-based defenses. See, Mendez v.
`Elliot,45 F.3d 75,,78 (4th Cir. 1995) (observing that dismissal "without prejudice" . . .
`
`"permits a plaintiff to refile the complaint as if it had never been filed," but does not give
`
`a plaintiff "a right to refile without the consequence of time defenses"); Finley v. Parvin/-
`Dohrmonn Co., Inc. , 520 F .2d 3 86, 391 (2d Cir. 1 97 5) (dismissal "without prejudice"
`equated with dismissal "with prejudice" when time-barred); Rinier v. News Syndicate
`
`I
`
`Co., lnc.,385 F.2d 818, 821 (2d Cir. 1967) (same); Allens CreeHCorbetts Glen Preserv.
`
`v. Caldrea, 88 F.Supp.2d77,83 (W.D.N.Y. 2000) ("Although plaintiffs' substantial
`
`delay before they commenced this action is sufficient for successful application of the
`
`laches defense, I note that plaintiffs' post-filing delay further supports my finding that
`
`plaintiffs have inordinately delayed their prosecution of this actioo."); see, also Powell v.
`Starwalt, 866 F .2d 964, 966 (7th Cir. 1989) ("'Without prejudice' does not mean 'with-
`
`out consequence."')
`
`Ecuabeverage presented an acquiescence defense in the civil action that will be
`
`-2-
`
`

`
`reviewed on appeal, which dates back to March 24,2005, when Brooklyn Bottling's
`former counsel informed Ecuabeverage's counsel that there is "no likelihood of confu-
`
`sion" between the parties' respective trademark/trade dress rights. ("Exhibit 3") Because
`
`the civil action brought by Brooklyn Bottling was dismissed - and is therefore legally
`
`treated as though it had never been brought - the acquiescence that commenced during
`
`March 2005 continues, unabated, for more than seven years. See, Rice v. Jq{ferson Pilot
`
`Financial Insurance Co.,578 F.3d 450,457 (6th Cir. 2009) ("It is generally accepted that
`
`a dismissal without prejudice leaves the situation the same as if the suit had never been
`
`brought, and that in the absence of a statute to the contrary a party cannot deduct from the
`
`period of the statute of limitations the time during which the action so dismissed was
`
`pending."); Davis v. Smith's Trans-fer, lnc.,841 F.2d139,140 (6th Cir. 1988) (finding
`
`that a plaintiff s suit that was voluntarily dismissed and then re-filed did not toll the statu-
`
`tory time period). A laches defense, dating back to March 2005, would also be available
`
`to Ecuabeverage in any future court proceeding, Conopco, Inc. v. Campbell Soup Co.,95
`F. 3d 187,192-193 (2d Cir. 1996) (six-year delay raises "presumption of laches"), and
`
`before the T.T.A.B., Teledltne Technologies Inc. v. Western Slqtwqts Inc., 78 USPQ2d
`
`12A3, nn G.T.A.B . 2AAq ("We find that petitioner's delay of over three and one-half
`
`years, and the complete absence of any reasonable excuse for its inaction, constitutes
`
`undue delay prior to filing the petition for cancellation.").r'
`
`1. Brooklyn Bottling's former counsel advised Ecuabeverage's counsel on March24,
`2005, that "there is no likelihood of confusion" between the respective trademark/trade
`dress rights of Brooklyn Bottling and Ecuabeverage. ("Exhibit 3") Petitioner Royal
`Signature, Inc. filed its petition for cancellation on July 3,2009 - four years and three
`months subsequent to Brooklyn Bottling's counsel's opinion of no likelihood of confu-
`sion. Because Brooklyn Bottling's case was dismissed for lack of prosecution, the delay
`in filing the cancellation petition can no long^er be excused by the pendency of litigation.
`- J -
`
`

`
`II. Scope of Ecuabeverage's Appeal Before the Second Circuit
`
`On Marchz2,2A12, Ecuabeverage appealed the District Court's Judgment,
`
`entered March 6,2Al2,to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. As Ecua-
`
`beverage's appeal concerns the dismissal of Brooklyn Bottling's litigation for lack of
`
`prosecution, Ecuabeverage's Notice of Appeal ("Exhibit 4") specifies that:
`
`"Defendant Ecuabeverage Corporation appeals from, and seeks
`appellate modification of, the Judgment and Order of the District
`Court on the ground that, and only to the extent that, the dismissal
`of all of Plaintiff s claims should have properly been 'with prejudice,'
`rather than 'without prejudice."'
`
`Ecuabeverage, of course, does not challenge, nor seek appellate review of, the District
`
`Court's dismissal, per se, of its own motion to dismiss Brooklyn Bottling's Amended
`
`Complaint for lack of prosecution. Ecuabeverage's appeal, in addition to having the
`
`Second Circuit review two orders denying summary judgment, seeks to reverse (or
`
`amend) the District Court's Judgment such that the dismissal of Brooklyn Bottling's case
`
`is "with prejudice" under one legal theory of another. (See, "Exhibit 5" providing a sum-
`
`mary of the "Nature of the Action" and "Proposed Issues to Be raised on Appeal" as part
`
`of Ecuabevrage's filing of "Form C," as filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals forthe
`
`Second Circuit on April 5,2A12.)
`
`Ecuabeverage wishes to make clear to the Board that it has not taken an appeal
`
`from the dismissal of Brooklyn Bottling's action for lack of prosecution, but solely
`
`whether the civil action shall be dismissed "without prejudice" or "on the merits," as
`
`would be the case had the District Court dismissed Brooklyn Bottling's action "with
`
`prejudice," as Ecuabeverage sought before the District Court.
`
`

`
`Brooklyn Bottling, for its part, neither filed an appeal nor cross-appeal from the
`
`District Court's Judgment dismissing its Amended Complaint for lack of prosecution.
`
`The time period for Brooklyn Bottling to have taken an appeal from the dismissal of its
`
`action for lack of prosecution expired April 5,2012. Because Brooklyn Bottling had not
`
`appealed from the District Court's Judgment that its civil action was properly dismissed
`for lack of prosecution (regardless of whether the dismissal should have been "with
`prejudice" or "without prejudice"), the dismissal of Brooklyn Bottling's civil action is
`
`now final and not subject to reversal on appeal. See, Leavell v. Illinois Dept. of Natural
`
`Resources, 600 F. 3d 798,804 n. 4 (7th Cir. 201 0), quoting El Paso Natural Gas Co.
`
`Neztsosie,526 U.S. 473,479 (1999) ("Absent a cross-appeal, the appellee may not seek
`to enlarge his own rights or 'lessen[] the rights of his adversary."') (internal quotation
`
`marks and citations omitted)).
`
`Hence, the outcome of Ecuabeverage's appeal to the Second Circuit will not- and
`
`cannot! - result in either reversal or vacatur of the District Court's decision to dismiss
`
`Brooklyn Bottling's civil action for lack of prosecution. The T.T.A.B. therefore need not
`
`concern itself that a dismissal of CancellationNo. 92051197 would be premised upon a
`
`judicial ruling that may ultimately not withstand appeal; the dismissal of Brooklyn
`
`Bottling's action for failure to prosecute in the District Court is now final.
`
`III. Conclusion
`
`The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board can readily and quite properly - on both
`
`procedural and equitable grounds - dismiss Cancellation No. 920 51197 , whether the
`
`Petitioner is Royal Signature, Inc. or Baloru S.A (both in privity with Brooklyn Bottling),
`
`-5-
`
`

`
`for "lack of prosecution" arising from Brooklyn Bottling's failure to prosecute the civil
`
`action for which this cancellation proceeding had been suspended. Having suspended
`
`Cancellation No. 92051197 pending Brooklyn Bottling's prosecution of the civil action,
`
`Brooklyn Bottling's failure to prosecute in federal district court should now logically
`
`extend to the Petitioner's failure to prosecute in Cancellation No. 920 51197 before the
`
`T.T.A.B., inasmuch as the cancellation proceeding was delayed due to a refusal or failure
`
`of either Royal Signature Inc.'s or Baldor S.A.'s privy to prosecute a related civil action.
`
`Ecuabeverage would consent to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's
`dismissal of Cancellation No. 920 51197 as being "without prejudice." In the event that
`
`Ecuabeverage prevails on its appeal to the Second Circuit, the practical legal effect of a
`dismissal of Cancellation No. 920 51197 "without prejudice" would be to convert the dis-
`missal to one "with prej udice" in accordance with the principles of res judicata and/or
`
`collateral estoppel/issue preclusion. It is for this reason that Ecuabeverage perceives of
`no necessity for the T.T.A.B. to "suspend" Cancellation No. 92A51197 for the purpose of
`
`awaiting a final judgment by the Second Circuit regarding whether the District Court
`correctly dismissed Brooklyn Bottling's civil action "without prejudice" or whether,
`
`instead, the District Court erred, under one legal theory or another, and that judgment by
`the District Court should have been entered against Brooklyn Bottling "on the merits."
`
`Should Brooklyn Bottling or any of its privies re-file another cancellation proceeding
`
`against Ecuabeverage's trademark registration, or should Ecuabeverge be unsuccessful on
`
`its appeal, Ecuabeverage would assert its time-based equitable defenses of laches and
`
`acquiescence via an early motion for summary judgment-
`
`-6-
`
`

`
`Accordingly, Respondent Ecuabeverage Corporation's Motion to Dismiss Cancel-
`
`lationNo.9205ll97for Lackof ProsecutioninView of Final DispositioninCivil
`
`Action should be granted and the petition for cancellation filed in CancellationNo.
`92A5liF7 should be dismissed "without prejudic e."2'
`
`Respectfully submitted
`
`ECUABEVERAGE CORPORATION
`
`Edwin D. Schindler
`Attorney for Petitioner
`Reg. No. 3 1,459
`
`4 High Oaks Court
`P. O. Box 4259
`Huntington, New York ll7$-4777
`
`(63 1)47 4-s373
`
`E-Mail : E D Schin dler @att.net
`ED S chindler@optonline. net
`
`April 9,2012
`
`2. Ecuabeverage is concurrently filing amotionto dismiss Counts II, III and IV of the
`Petition to Cancel for Cancellation No. 92051197, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. l2(bx6), for
`failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. In order to expedite the eventual
`termination of Cancellation No. 92051197 , the Board is requested to concurrently consid-
`er both the instant motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution and the motion to dismiss
`under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(bX6) on their merits.
`
`-7-
`
`

`
`EXHIBIT 1
`EXHIBIT 1
`
`

`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`X
`
`BROOKLYN BOTTLING OF MILTON,
`NEW YORK, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`'against-
`
`ECUABEVERAGE CORP.,
`
`Defendant. ------x
`
`USDC SDN}'
`DOCI.'MENT
`ETECTRONICALLY FILED
`DOC #:
`DA1E FILED: 9
`
`07 cIvIL 8433 (AKII)
`
`ruD.-GMENT
`
`Whereas the above-captioned action having come before this Court, ild on March 5,2412,
`
`the Court heard oral argument on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Attorney's Fees,
`
`and plaintiff s Cross-Motion to Join Baloru S.A. and the matter having come before the Honorable
`
`Alvin K. Hellerstein, United States District Judge, and the Court, on March6,20l2, having rendered
`
`its Order granting Defendant's Motion to dismiss, and dismissing Defendants' counterclaims against
`
`plaintiff, the dismissals are without prejudice and costs, denying Defendants' Motion for Award of
`
`Attomey's Fees, and Plaintiff s Motion to Join, it is,
`
`ORDERED, AIIJUDGED
`
`AND DECREED:
`
`That forthe reasons stated inthe
`
`Court's Order dated March 6, 2A12, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is granted; Defendants'
`
`counterclaims against Plaintiff are dismissed; the dismissals are without prejudice and costs;
`
`Defendants'Motion forAward of Attorney's Fees, ffid PlaintifPs Motionto Join are denied.
`
`Dated: New York, New York
`March 6,2A12
`
`RUBY J. KRAJICK
`RUBY J. KRAJICK
`
`\ L = " / / '
`
`)
`
`THIS DOCTIMENT WAS ENTERED
`ON TI{EDOCKETON
`
`

`
`Case 1:07-cv-08483-AKH Document 142 Filed WlA6l12 Page 1 of 1
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NAW YORK
`
`BROOKLY:hI BOTTLING OF MIL?ON, NHW
`YORK, [NC,,
`
`-agaln$t-
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`gCUABEVERAGE CORF.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`L r f l t i n \ \ '
`D ( X ' 1 ' t f F \ I
`r-l- r-{ TRSttiICALL?
`{ } { ' # :
`:
`r
`
`FIL€
`
`f}
`
`*RDER GRAIITTI{g Mp.XION TO
`pr$ffrs$ ANI} nE$ilHEpi[r{FR
`h,Iol;IpN$
`
`G7 Civ" 8483 {AKH)
`
`ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN, T].$.DJ.:
`
`On Mffch 5,2t12,1 heard cral argument on Defendant's Motion to ilismiss nnd
`
`Motion for Award af Attorney's Fees, and Flaintiffs Cross-Motian tB Join Balonr S'A. Far the
`
`reass$s stated sn the record, Defend*nt's Mction to Dismiss is grantsd. Additionally,
`
`Defendant's ccunterclaims against Plaiutiff are dismissed. The dismissals are without prejudice
`
`snd costs. Defendant's Motion for Award of Attorney's Fees, and Plaintiff s Motion to Join ffe
`
`denied. The clerk shall termipetf docurnent number 129 and close the docket.
`
`Dated:
`
`SO ORFERED.
`/
`.2oto
`March t;
`New Yo;E New York
`
`nited Stntes District Judge
`
`

`
`C 3 5 e b r o c
`U N I T E D S T A T E S D ] S T R I C T C O U R T
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`- - - - - - - x
`- -
`
`BROOKLYN BOTTLTNG OF MTLTON,
`N E W Y O R K , r N C . ,
`
`P l a i n t i f f ,
`
`v .
`
`0 7 C V B 4 B 3 ( A t ( H )
`
`E C U A B E V E R A G E , C O R P . ,
`
`Defendant.
`
`- -
`
`- - - - - - - x
`
`B e f o r e :
`
`M a r c h 5 , 2 0 L 2
`
`H O N . A L V r N K . H E L L E R S T E T N ,
`
`D i s t r i c t
`
`J u d g e
`
`APPEARANCES
`
`L A W O F F T C E S O F P . B . T U F A R T E L L O , P C
`f o r P l a i n t i f f
`A t t o r n e y s
`PANAGIOTA BETTY TUFARIELLO
`
`BY:
`
`E D W I N D . S C H I N D L E R
`f o r D e f e n d a n t
`A L t o r n e v
`
`S O U T H E R N D I S T R I C T R E P O R T E R S , P . C .
`( 2 L 2 ) 8 0 5 - 0 3 0 0
`
`1
`1
`2
`
`2 3
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4 4
`
`5 5
`
`6 6
`
`1-
`
`7
`
`
`
`B B
`
`9
`1 0
`1 1
`1 1
`7 2
`7 2
`1 3
`
`1 ' )
`- L J
`
`1 4
`I 4
`15
`1 5
`1 6
`L 6
`L]
`I 1
`1 8
`1 8
`L 9
`T 9
`2 0
`2 1
`2 2
`2 3
`2 4
`2 5
`
`

`
`C35ebroc
`C 3 5 e b r o c
`
`Y s v r u t
`
`L !
`
`V y r v o
`
`L r M r i
`
`u ! !
`
`v
`
`(In open court)
`( I n o p e n c o u r t )
`THl DLPUTY CLERK: Appearing for the plaintiff today,
`t h e p l a i n t i f f
`t o d a y ,
`f o r
`T H E D E P U T Y C L E R K : A p p e a r i n g
`t h e d e f e n d a n t ,
`R e p r e s e n t i n g
`i s B e t t y T u f a r i e l l o .
`your Honor,
`is Betty Tufariello. Representing the defendant,
`V o u r H o n o r ,
`Mr. Edwin Schindler.
`I t r . E d w i n S c h i n d l e r .
`Please be seated, counsel.
`c o u n s e l .
`P l e a s e b e s e a t e d ,
`THE COURT:
`I
`think the first thing I'd like to do,
`t o d o ,
`l i k e
`I ' d
`t h i n g
`f j - r s t
`t h e
`t h i n k
`I
`T H E C O U R T :
`Ms. Tufariello,
`is for you to explain the assignments.
`t h e a s s i g n m e n t s .
`f o r y o u t o e x p l a i n
`i s
`M s . T u f a r i e l l o ,
`What we have here is a case that was begun in 2007.
`t h a t w a s b e g u n i n 2 0 0 1 .
`i s a c a s e
`w h a t w e h a v e h e r e
`o f 2 0 1 0 .
`As
`I recall, all discovery was completed in April of 2010.
`i n A p r i l
`a l l d i s c o v e r y w a s c o m p l e t e d
`r e c a l l ,
`A s I
`these are now motions made after discovery.
`d i s c o v e r y -
`t h e s e a r e n o w m o t i o n s m a d e a f t e r
`N o t h i n g h a s h a p p e n e d ,
`No trial date has yet been set. Nothing has happened,
`d a t e h a s y e t b e e n s e t .
`N o t r i a l
`as far as I understand,
`in the case for about a year. And we
`t h e C a S e f o r a b o u t a y e a r .
`A n d w e
`i n
`a S f a r a S I u n d e r s t a n d ,
`have two motions before me, one by the defendant to dismiss for
`f o r
`t o d i s m i s s
`t h e d e f e n d a n t
`t w o m o t i o n s b e f o r e m e , o n e b y
`h a v e
`a n d o n e b y t h e p l a i n t i f f
`lack of prosecution and for sanctions, and one by the plaintiff
`a n d f o r s a n c t i o n s ,
`l a c k o f p r o s e c u t i o n
`I
`t h e p r e s e n t o w n e r ,
`p a r t y ,
`to add an allegedly indispensable party,
`the present owner,
`I
`i n d i s p e n s a b l e
`t o a d d a n a t l e g e d l y
`guess, of the trademark.
`c r l r e . q s . o f
`t h e
`t r a d e m a r k .
`The trademark number 1,474,395 issued by the United
`t h e U n i t e d
`i s s u e d b y
`T h e t r a d e m a r k n u m b e r ! , 4 1 4 , 3 9 5
`States Patent and Trademark Office for a first use April 19,
`1 9 ,
`u s e A p r i l
`f o r a f i r s t
`S t a t e s P a t e n t a n d T r a d e m a r k O f f i c e
`t h e w o r d s
`I966 in commerce is Tropical Puro sabor Nacional,
`the words
`P u r o S a b o r N a c i o n a l ,
`1 9 6 6 i n c o m m e r c e i s T r o p i c a t
`i t s e l f .
`i n
`h a r r i n r r i r o o n c l i s r : I a i m e d a s a t r a d e m a r k
`f r o n i r : a l
`tropical having been disclaimed as a trademark in itself.
`i t s e l f .
`t h e u s e o f P u r o S a b o r b y
`Also,
`there is a disclaimer to the use of Puro Sabor by itself.
`t o
`i - s a d i s c l a i m e r
`t h e r e
`A l s o ,
`b e a
`p u r o s a b o r
`c a n ' t
`A n d N a c i o n a l
`Puro sabor is Spanish for pure flavor. And Nacional can't be a
`f o r p u r e
`f l a v o r .
`i s S p a n i s h
`trademark either.
`So each element of this trademark is
`i s
`t r a d e m a r k
`S o e a c h e l e m e n t o f
`t h i s
`e i t h e r .
`t r a d e m a r k
`f o r
`disclaimed in its own right. And you have the trademark for
`A n d y o u h a v e
`t r a d e m a r k
`t h e
`o w n r i g h t .
`i t s
`i n
`d i s c l a i m e d
`t r u e
`the entire phrase in English translated as tropical true
`a s t r o p i c a l
`i _ h o o n t ' i r e n h r a s e
`i n F , n c r l i s h
`t r a n s l a t e d
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
`S O U T H E R N D I S T R I C T R E P O R T E R S , P . C .
`(212) 805-0300
`( 2 r 2 ) 8 0 5 - 0 3 0 0
`
`S o
`So
`
`1234561B9
`
`5—‘C)KOOO\lO‘\LFV>1>(.«JI\)l—'C>LOOD\l(fiU“s-l>L,«)[\)}—~‘
`
`1 0
`1 1
`I 2
`1 3
`I 4
`1 5
`L 6
`T 1
`1 B
`1 9
`2 0
`2 7
`
`I\)l\)?-‘:~*i—‘|—‘¥4>4)—‘b—‘I-'|—‘
`
`1 1
`L L
`
`[\)l\)E\)[\)
`
`U'|»J>-L;d[\)
`
`2 3
`2 4
`2 5
`
`

`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`B
`9
`1 0
`1 1
`L 2
`1 3
`7 4
`1 5
`I G
`7 1
`1 8
`1 9
`2 0
`2 L
`2 2
`2 3
`2 4
`2 5
`
`C 3 5 e b r o c
`n a t i o n a l
`
`f l a v o r .
`t o B a n c o d e l P a c i f i c o ,
`T h e t r a d e m a r k w a s i s s u e d
`i n E c u a d o r -
`i n c o r p o r a t e d
`c o r p o r a t i o n
`t o s d Y , o n t h e v a r i o u s
`I h a v e
`T a m n o t c l e a r ,
`to a company named Royal and now to a company
`one
`assignments,
`t h a t u p .
`t o c l e a r
`a s k M s . T u f a r i e l l o
`A n d I ' 1 I
`n a m e d B a l o r u .
`A n d g o o d
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : T h a n k Y o u , y o u r H o n o r -
`
`S A , a
`
`a f t e r n o o n .
`
`3
`
`t h e w a y t h i s
`
`T H E C O U R T : G o o d a f t e r n o o n -
`l o o k a t
`I n d e e d , w h e n y o u
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O :
`i s c o n f u s i n g .
`i t
`t r a d e m a r k h a s g o n e b a c k a n d f o r t h ,
`E x p l a i n
`p l e a s e .
`T H E C O U R T : A n s w e r m y q u e s t i o n ,
`t h e a s s i g n o r ?
`t h e a s s i g n e e ? W h o i s
`a s s i g n m e n t s . W h o i s
`t h e s i t u a t i o n ?
`W h a t ' s
`t h i s m o m e n t p r e s e n t l y ,
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : T o d a y a t
`i s B a l - o r u S A .
`T h e a s s i g n e e
`i s B r o o k l y n B o t t l i n g .
`T H E C O U R T : B - A - L - O - R ?
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : U , s P a c e
`i n c o r p o r a t e d
`T H E C O U R T : A c o r p o r a t i o n
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : Y e s , Y o u r H o n o r -
`i n N e w Y o r k ?
`T H E C O U R T : W i t h a n y p r e s e n c e
`y o u r H o n o r .
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : N o t c u r r e n t l y ,
`A n d w h e n w a s t h a t a s s i g n m e n t m a d e ?
`T H E C O U R T : O k a y .
`i n m y
`i n d i c a t e d
`i s
`a s
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : T h e a s s i g n m e n L ,
`I b e l i e v e , w a s i n M a y o f 2 0 7 T -
`S O U T H E R N D I S T R I C T R E P O R T E R S ' P . C .
`( 2 r 2 ) 8 0 5 - 0 3 0 0
`
`a s s i g n o r
`
`p a p e r s ,
`
`t h e
`
`t h e
`
`i n E c u a d o r ?
`
`

`
`C 3 5 e b r o c
`
`4
`
`! v y !
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 1 B 9
`
`1 0
`1 1
`1 )
`
`I J
`I 4
`1 5
`L 6
`I 1
`1 B
`1 9
`2 0
`) 1
`
`L
`
`L 2
`
`2
`2 3
`2 4
`2 5
`
`t h e r e h a d b e e n a n o t h e r
`T H E C O U R T : N o w , p r e v i o u s l y
`t h a t '
`T e l l m e a b o u t
`t h e n a m e R o y a l -
`a c o m p a n y w i t h
`a s s i g n m e n t ,
`t h e r e
`a c t u a l l y '
`t o
`t h a t ,
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : P r e v i o u s l y
`n o t
`f r o m
`t o B r o o k l y n B o t t l - i t g ,
`f r o m R o y a l
`w a s a n a s s i g n m e n t
`c o u r t
`t h i s
`t o
`w h e n t h e s e p r o c e e d i n g s w e r e b r o u g h t
`T u b a R o y a l .
`t o R o y a l S i g n a t u r e .
`t r a d e m a r k b e l o n g e d
`t h e
`i n i t i a l t y ,
`T H E C O U R T : T h e R o y a l s i g n a t u r e w a s a c o m p a n y ?
`i s a c o m p a n y
`I t
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O :
`T H E C O U R T : C o r P o r a t i o n ?
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : Y e s -
`w h e r e ?
`I n c o r P o r a t e d
`T H E C O U R T :
`i n P a n a m a '
`I t ' s
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O :
`THE COURT: Panamanian comPanY?
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : Y e s , Y o u r H o n o r '
`i n N e w Y o r k ?
`T H E C O U R T : A n d a n y p r e s e n c e
`j - n f a c t ,
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : W e h a v e a n a g e n t a n d ,
`t h e a g e n t a n d
`i s
`M r . C a r l o s A r i a s , w h o i s h e r e w i t h m e t o d a y ,
`t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s .
`i n
`o f R o y a l S i g n a t u r e
`r o n r e s e n f a f i v e
`t h e
`a s s i g n e d
`T H E C O U R T : A n d R o y a l S i g n a t u r e
`t o B r o o k l Y n B o t t l i n g ?
`t h a t a s s i g n m e n t
`B u t
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : Y e s , y o u r H o n o r .
`t o o ,
`i s ,
`A n d t h a t
`h a p p e n i n g .
`t h i n g s
`o n c e r t a i n
`w a s c o n t i n g e n t
`t h e
`o f o n e o f
`b Y v i r t u e
`c o u r t ,
`i n
`t h i s
`r e c o r d
`o f
`f a c t ,
`i n
`i n
`m y a d v e r s a r y ,
`t h a t w a s p u t b y M r . S c h i n d l e r ,
`e x h i b i t s
`I h a v e
`A l 1
`r e p l y .
`t h e
`T H E C O U R T : L e t m e f i n d
`S O U T H E R N D I S T R I C T R E P O R T E R S ' P . C .
`( 2 7 2 ) 8 0 5 - 0 3 0 0
`
`t r a d e m a r k
`
`r e p l y '
`i s a
`
`

`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`B
`9
`1 0
`1 1
`L 2
`1 3
`L 4
`1 5
`l C
`1 1
`1 8
`L g
`2 0
`2 I
`2 2
`2 3
`2 4
`2 5
`
`f\)>—-'(DkOCD\]O“.U1LJ>U.)l\)>—*
`L7'>1>-L;.)l\)|4(DkOCO\lO‘\U‘!J>UJ
`
`l-4?—*I—4
`
`l\)l\)[\)l\)l\)[\J|—‘|—-‘I-‘l—‘%-—'}—*|*4
`
`:)
`
`C35ebroc
`C 3 5 e b r o c
`brief.
`b r i e f .
`
`MS. TUFARIELLO: Actually, your Honor, it is document
`i t
`i s d o c u m e n t
`y o u r H o n o r ,
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : A c t u a l l y ,
`130-3 on the court docket.
`1 3 0 - 3 o n t h e c o u r t d o c k e t .
`THE COURT: Security interest?
`i n t e r e s t ?
`T H E C O U R T : S e c u r i t Y
`It's not really a
`MS. TUFARIELLO: Yes, your Honor.
`r e a 1 1 y a
`n o t
`I t ' s
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : Y e s , y o u r H o n o r .
`I t w a s a n a s s i - g : n m e n t , a n d i t w a s c o n t i n g e n t
`security interest.
`It was an assignment, and it was contingent
`i n t e r e s t .
`s e c u r i t y
`on certain events happening.
`e v e n t s h a P P e n i n g .
`o n c e r t a i n
`THE COURT:
`So then how is Brooklyn Bottling a real
`a r e a l
`T H E C O U R T : S o t h e n h o w i s B r o o k l y n B o t t l i n g
`party in interest?
`i n t e r e s t ?
`p a r t y
`i n
`MS. TUFARIELLO:
`They had an assignment, and the
`a n d t h e
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O : T h e y h a d a n a s s i g n m e n t ,
`understanding was ——
`w a s
`u n d e r s t a n d i n g
`THE COURT: But it's contingent. Contingent means
`C o n t i n g e n t m e a n s
`i t ' s
`c o n t i n g e n t .
`T H E C O U R T : B u t
`subject to conditions precedent.
`p r e c e d e n t .
`t o c o n d i t i o n s
`s u b j e c t
`MS. TUFARIELLO:
`It was an outright assignment, except
`e x c e p t
`a s s i g n m e n t ,
`I t w a s a n o u t r i g h t
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O :
`h a d t o
`t h i n g s
`c e r t a i n
`that in exchange for that assignment, certain things had to
`t h a t a s s i g n m e n t ,
`f o r
`i n e x c h a n g e
`t h a t
`t - h a t
`h a d t o b e m a d e f o r
`h a d t o b e p a i d ,
`happen. Consideration had to be paid, had to be made for that
`C o n s i d e r a t i o n
`h a p p e n .
`assignment.
`a s s i g n m e n t .
`t h e
`When the assignment was actually filed showing the
`f i l e d
`s h o w i n g
`W h e n t h e a s s i g n m e n t w a s a c t u a l l y
`transfer of the trademark from Royal Signature to Brooklyn
`t o B r o o k l y n
`f r o m R o y a l S i g n a t u r e
`t r a d e m a r k
`t h e
`o f
`t r a n s f e r
`b u t
`h a d b e e n f u l f i l l e d ,
`Bottling, part of the consideration had been fulfilled, but
`p a r t o f
`t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n
`B o t t l i r g ,
`t h e a s s i g n m e n t w a s
`B u t
`t h e p r o c e s s .
`part of it was still in the process. But
`the assignment was
`i n
`i t w a s s t i l l
`p a r t o f
`c o u l d b e g i v e n
`t h e o p p o r t u n i t y
`filed so that Brooklyn Bottling could be given the opportunity
`s o t h a t B r o o k l y n B o t t l i n g
`f i l e d
`to continue with the prosecution of this case.
`c a s e -
`t h e p r o s e c u t i o n
`o f
`t h i s
`t o c o n t i n u e w i t h
`t h e
`r e v i e w e d
`a n d I
`Subsequently, after I was retained and I reviewed the
`I w a s r e t a i n e d
`a f t e r
`S u b s e q u e n t l y ,
`j - n t h e
`documents, we came to recognize that the second item in the
`i t e m
`t h e s e c o n d
`t h a t
`r e c o g n i z e
`d o c u m e n t s , w e c a m e t o
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
`S O U T H E R N D I S T R I C T R E P O R T E R S , P . C .
`(212) 805-0300
`( 2 r 2 ) 8 0 5 - 0 3 0 0
`
`

`
`LOCI)\)O\(_J"».BbJl\)}4
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`B
`9
`1 0
`11
`1 1
`12
`1 2
`13
`1 3
`14
`7 4
`15
`1 5
`16
`1 6
`17
`1 ' 7
`I
`L
`18-x
`1 8
`J.
`1 9
`20
`2 0
`21
`2 I
`22
`2 2
`23
`2 3
`24
`2 4
`25
`2 5
`
`seven,
`s e v e n ,
`
`6
`
`Is it Exhibit 3 to Mr. Schindler's
`3 t o M r . S c h i n d l e r ' s
`i t E x h i b i t
`I s
`
`C35ebroc
`C 3 5 e b r o c
`consideration, which was the security of $2 million, if the
`o f $ Z m i l l i o n ,
`i f
`t h e
`w h i c h w a s t h e s e c u r i t y
`c o n s i d e r a t i o n ,
`Court takes a moment to look at that assignment, which is 130-3
`i s 1 3 0 - 3
`t h a t a s s i g n m e n t , w h i c h
`l o o k a t
`t a k e s a m o m e n t t o
`C o u r t
`on the court record --
`r e c o r d
`o n t h e c o u r t
`Is it part of the record?
`THE COURT:
`r e c o r d ?
`i t P a r t o f
`t h e
`I s
`T H E C O U R T :
`THE LAW CLERK:
`It's in the declaration.
`I t ' s
`i n
`t h e d e c l a r a t i o n .
`T H E L A W C L E R K :
`(Pause)
`( P a u s e )
`THE COURT:
`T H E C O U R T :
`affirmation?
`a f f i r m a t i o n ?
`I believe
`I believe so, your Honor.
`MS. TUFARIELLO:
`s o , y o u r H o n o r .
`f b e l i e v e
`I b e l i e v e
`M S . T U F A R I E L L O :
`t h e
`f i r s t
`so. And if I may direct the Court's attention to the first
`t o
`a t t e n t i o n
`t h e C o u r t ' s
`I m a y d i r e c t
`A n d i f
`s o .
`d o c k e t
`page of the assignment, which is identified on the court docket
`o n t h e c o u r t
`t h e a s s i g n m e n t , w h i c h
`i s
`i d e n t i f i e d
`p a g e o f
`as page three of seven, paragraph D --
`t h r e e o f s e v e n , p a r a g r a p h D
`a s p a g e
`THE COURT:
`I have page one of seven, page two of
`I h a v e p a g e o n e o f s e v e n , P a g e t w o o f
`T H E C O U R T :
`I have page three of seven, all right.
`r i g h t .
`I h a v e p a g e t h r e e o f s e v e n , a l l
`MS. TUFARIELLO: Yes, your Honor.
`M S . T U F A R . I E L L O : Y e s , Y o u r H o n o r .
`to
`So if I may direct your attention, your Honor,
`y o u r H o n o r ,
`t o
`f m a y d j - r e c t y o u r a t t e n t i o n ,
`S o i f
`n a r - ^ - 1 p h D ,
`t h e c o n t r a r y ,
`paragraph D, it says notwithstanding anything to the contrary,
`t o
`a n y t h i n g
`s a y s n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g
`i t
`y o L a , v L a
`the amount of the collateral secured by this agreement will be
`a g r e e m e n t w i l l
`b e
`s e c u r e d b y
`t h i s
`t h e c o l l a t e r a l -
`t h e a m o u n t o f
`$2 million. And if the Court takes the time to read the rest
`r e s t
`t o
`r e a d
`t h e
`t h e
`t i m e
`t a k e s
`t h e C o u r t
`A n d i f
`$ Z m i l l i o n .
`of this assignment,
`this agreement,
`the Court will see that in
`i n
`t h e C o u r t w i l l
`s e e t h a t
`t h i s a g r e e m e n t ,
`t h i s a s s i g n m e n t ,
`o f
`addition -— that in exchange for this assignment, a
`a s s i g t n m e n t , a
`f o r
`t h i s
`i n e x c h a n q e
`t h a t
`a d d i t i o n
`col