Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`ESTTA595989
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`04/02/2014
`
`Filing date:
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`92056888
`Plaintiff
`Isaac A. Potter Jr.
`ISAAC A POTTER JR
`5503 S TAMPA AVENUE
`ORLANDO, FL 32839
`UNITED STATES
`ipotter2000@yahoo.com
`Other Motions/Papers
`Isaac/A/Potter/Jr
`ipotter2000@yahoo.com
`Isaac/A/Potter/Jr
`04/02/2014
`Relief # 2.pdf(1037790 bytes )
`
`Proceeding
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`Filer's Name
`Filer's e-mail
`Signature
`Date
`Attachments
`
`

`
`«Case 1213-CV—01417—CMH-IDD Document 30 Flled 01/17/14 Page 15 OT 24 PageID# 255
`
`us, CWT mg/lppeléi fiotllttgaeml Cuwxl
`
`
`
`CASE NO. 1:13-CV-01417-CMH-[DD DOCUMENT 18 01/07/2013
`
`Case; Ma)./Ll-I879
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
`
`ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
`
`ISAAC A. POTTER JR .,
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO. I213-CV-0141 7—CMH-IDD
`
`
`
`0/we Ma. 14- 23379’
`
`PLAINTIFF,
`
`CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`V.
`
`1. FRAUD IN FACTUM
`
`1. ROBERTA S. BREN et al
`
`2. FRAUD INDUCEMENT
`
`2. OBLON SPIVAK
`
`3. CLERCIAL MISPRISION
`
`3. TOEI ANIMATION CO, LTD 4. FRAUD UPON THE TTAB/uspto/us court
`
`4. LINDA M. KING et al
`
`5. Breach of Fiduciary Duty
`
`5. Teresa Rea Stanek et al
`/j\).g4L‘5,{g<3+D‘g:Iio(ia "tE(j.;fl‘K.\J..3"i'(_"J('/'_V‘r"'mc.5€:13 I
`
`(
`
`G-Mal REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT I-an AH:,,QM/,t+, V3
`
`LXI?I/CL _ .6
`
`J ,
`
`_
`
`Pursuant to Rule 58(a) The plaintiff request that judgment for $ 1 ,000,000,000.00
`(one billion dollars) for immediate relief and any other damages, statutory
`damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, interest and any other relief
`according to law be set out in a separate document as required by Rule 58(a).
`
`(The Washington (C.C.A 2d, 1926) 16 F. (2d)(206); See commissioner of Internal
`Revenue v. Bedford’s Estate (1945) 325 U.S. 283
`
`The defendants Delay and Failure to Appear, thereby causing a default and a
`consequent Forfeiture of the property. Limited Appearance, local Rules require the
`
`*//2//v
`/ OM61’ 5
`/ll///x~7/nma
`
`

`
`-Case 1113-CV-01417-CMH-IDD Document 30 Flled 01/17/14 Page 16 OT 24 PageID# 256
`
`endorsement of local (admitted) counsel and all pleadings therefore the Plaintiff
`issue a constitutional challenge to a statue (rule 5.1) pursuant to loca1;Rule 83(D).
`
`Certificate of Service
`
`I hereby certify that on this 7"‘ day of January 2014 a copy of the Request for Entry
`of Judgment Rule 58(a) was/were mailed, postage prepaid to:
`
`1. Clerk, Fernando Galindo, Albert V. Bryan U.S. Courthouse, Eastern District
`
`1
`
`.
`
`ofVirginia (AlcfdrifiDivision), 401 Courthouse Square‘, AlexandriaVA
`22f3.‘14
`I K
`‘
`<*-"“""'_.7_—‘-.--F
`5
`-‘K
`
`_
`
`_.-
`
`L
`
`..«
`
`A."
`
`
`
`ISAAC A. POTTER JR, 5503 S. TAMPA AVENUE, ORLANDO, FL 32839, 407-
`
`217-3 120, ipotter2000@yahoo.com
`
`
`
`
`
`-
`
`
`
`
`
`LESAMAETHOMAS
`Notary Public. State of Florida
`Commissions EE 6979
`My comm. expires Jul? 7. 2014
`
`

`
`‘Case 1213-CV-01417-CMH-|DD Document 30 Filed 01/17/14 Page 9 OT 24 PageID# 249
`
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1451
`
`Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
`P.0. Box 1451
`-
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Mailed: November 3, 2013
`
`Cancellation No. 92056888
`
`Isaac A. Potter Jr.
`
`‘
`
`V.
`
`Toei Animation Co., Ltd.
`
`Before Bucher, Kuhlke and Gorowitz,
`Administrative Trademark Judges.
`
`By the Board:
`
`On August 12, 2013,
`
`the Board denied the parties’ respective motions for
`
`summary judgment and determined that the petition to cancel “does not state
`
`petitioner's claims with particularity and includes several claims beyond the Board’s
`
`jurisdiction.” The Board allowed petitioner time in which to file “an amended
`
`petition to cancel which adequately pleads fraud” and noted that failure to comply
`
`would result in dismissal.
`
`c
`
`Thereafter, petitioner filed several copies of an amended petition but failed to
`
`include a certificate of service on respondent’s counsel. On September 27, 2013, the
`
`Board issued an order allowing petitioner ten days in which to file proof of service of
`
`any or all of certain of its previously-filed and unserved communications. On
`
`October 4, 2013, petitioner re-filed an amended petition to cancel for fraud, which
`
`Aiiflclq wxeni
`><
`l/M/II/A /ll
`
`i’l> Cu.
`
`halal
`\./4
`
`[51/(9/7/‘,3
`l\Kn/l.
`
`‘idea
`
`

`
`.Case 1213-CV-01417-CMH-IDD Document 30 Flled 01/17/14 Page 10 OT 24 PageID# 250
`
`Cancellation No. 92056888
`
`includes a certificate of service of a copy thereof on counsel
`September 30, 2013.
`
`for respondent on
`I
`
`The Board has thoroughly reviewed petitioner’s amended pleading. The petition
`
`continues to include claims outside of the Board’s jurisdiction, e.g. “violation of
`
`economic espionage act of 1996,” and does not adequately set forth a claim of fraud.
`
`In order to properly plead a claim of fraud in a trademark cancellation
`proceeding, a petitioner must allege with particularity the statement of facts upon
`
`which the belief is founded. See, e.g., DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. American Motors
`
`Corp., 94 USPQ2d 1086 (TTAB 2010). The amended pleading fails to sufficiently set
`
`forth a claim of fraud on the United States Patent and Trademark Office in the
`
`procurement or maintenance of Registration No. 3431651 because it does not allege
`
`the specific misrepresentation, if any, respondent knowingly made in obtaining or
`
`maintaining the registration. For example,
`
`the general statements that “the
`
`statement of use is fraudulent” (amended pleading 1] 8) and that “false statements
`
`regarding ‘use’ whether the mark is in use or not and when that use started in the
`
`United States" (amended pleading 1| 9) are too vague to support the claim. A “false"
`
`date of use is not material, and thus does not constitute fraud, unless the use did not
`
`commence until after the date of ‘the filing of the statement of use, in this case
`
`March 6, 2008. See Standard Knitting, Ltd. v. Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha, 77
`
`USPQ2d 1917 (TTAB 2006); Colt Industries Operating Corp. v. Olivetti Controllo
`
`Numerico S.p.A., 221 USPQ 73, 76 (TTAB 1983) (“The Examining Attorney gives no
`
`consideration to alleged dates of first use in determining whether conflicting marks
`
`/ll-l'nc’.l'WY\€~'\‘l' /4
`Upf-+6-*
`
`2
`rm M0
`
`15%/[Q7/';,«3
`
`

`
`.Case 1113-CV-01417-CMH-IDD Document 30 Flled 01/17/14 Page 11 OT 24 PageID# 251
`
`Cancellation No. 92056888
`
`should be published for opposition.”). Notably, petitioner does not specifically allege
`
`that respondent never used the mark or that any use commencedafter March 6,
`
`2068.
`
`Rather,
`
`the allegation continues to set
`
`forth imprecise and general
`
`statements.
`
`Because the pleading fails to sufficiently plead a claim of fraud, or any other
`
`available ground for cancellation which is under the Boards jurisdiction, and
`
`consistent with the order issued on August 12, 2013. judgment is hereby entered
`
`against petitioner, and the petition to cancel is dismissed with prejudice.
`
`
`
`3
`
`1%/Q7/) 1
`
`l'lQ /1.!
`
`/7|)//'/"‘7
`
`’Er%’J
`
`

`
`GENERAL AFFIDAVIT
`
`State of Florida
`County of ___OR.ANGE
`
`BEFORE ME, the undersigned Notary,
`[name ofNotary
`
`before whom affidavit is sworn], on this
`[day ofmonth] day
`of- MARGH
`[month], 201€'~f _, personally appeared
`[name ofafiiant],
`
`known to me to be a credible person and of lawful age, who being by me first duly
`sworn, on
`[his or her] oath, deposes and says:
`
`Q I’
`
`___;.'_
`
`_
`
`‘E3
`
`(M1 .1 11114::
`
`ffhof '
`..
`
`2:...)
`
`e
`
`
`
`P?
`
`
`
`
`
`[signarureH 1'z«- m‘
`ISAA A. POTTER JR
`
`5503 S .77>,m@ Avenue
`
`[address ofafliant, [in 1]
`ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32839, 407-217-3120, EMAIL:
`ipotter2000@yahoo.com
`[address ofafiianr, line 2]
`
`State of Florid
`
`5&
`County of
`Sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me this
`
`day of
`
`E130.-"1='LU'd
`
`.4-'..Ie.1qg1 flunog aErue.1g,gg:3|_
`
`1:Lgz_.r|_g_.-go
`
`

`
`(year),by
`
`/F
`
`'3;
`
`
`
`(name
`
`er‘
`
`11 making statement).
`
`
`(Signature ofNotary Public - State of Florida)
`Gum mm!
`(Print, Type, or Stamp CommissionedName ofNotary Public)1/
`Personally Known
`ORProdu ed Ide tifiniation
`TypeofIdentificationProduced
`{g :1 E Q
`
`
`
`(C/We-/s4»/379)
`
`(W
`
`“="'r“'-‘lF|'r|
`
`(W4?
`
`MEJCH1 «human 35U9Jl2|£€lEL
`
`HEIZ.-"LE.-"SCI
`
`

`
`[ ZQILZIEWN ]
`
`..Z€.90o0
`Xvi
`>10
`U0/L911!-ION OOIXOOZ
`saLu_L_|_
`adfl
`zunsau
`H33/uonnlosaa
`§HREGIS"I'ERED7‘§GEN'I':‘BRAD LY'l']...l::}
`_ 1940 DUKE STREET
`ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA 22314
`
`I00
`BASESRZUE 99:21 VI/12/'80
`‘on
`uo!.12u_L3,sea emu pun 3120
`-4. .h"K.—2'{UU'UPUN'Tf1Ji'T"I_l‘iEB’fUSF1U“_"'
`5. BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY
`'
`
`3. TERESA STANEK REA et al
`P.0. Box 14510500 Dulany Street)
`Alexandria, Virginia 22314-5796
`
`4. LINDAM. KING at al
`13.0. Box 1451 (600 Dulany stmet) 22314-5796
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1451
`RespondentslDefendants,
`
`
` _ ‘_
`-10
`.._-,._
`;3“9“‘"°°0
`-'
`" 1
`,
`X
`I‘
`i1'993“39U1"'-U3935'3'-°°°p
`g’/2' /'4
`02/ 4
`aJ,a|dLuo3
`
`(C:
`
`8'90 359:!
`
`..Z€.90o0
`
`:3“-|.lJ. L910].
`
`986010 5'0N q0[‘
`
`
`
`
`=
`>'
`-5-:-: .,
`.
`mo'too‘oooL‘eHzJ [;oo'1oo'ooII‘Hh2] [1'L0‘100'DO0I >ma]
`zv=zI V102/12/E0
`
`'['IIOZ 100'€00‘00;lZ—[‘|nlZ
`
`(‘(1% 1'!Mr
`
`
`
`uo LSJBA GJEMUJJ !._-_-[
`
`
`
`|=.Iua:Infi>IB:
`
`uodeu unseu puss
`
`

`
`SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION
`
`. Qompletiejtenis 1, 2, and 3. _Also complete
`item 4 if Restricted Delivery I5 desired.
`I Print your name and address on the reverse
`so that we can return the card to ycu._ _A
`I Attach this card to the back of the mallprece.
`or on the front if space pennrts.
`
`1. Article Addressed to:
`
`COMPLETE TH!S SECTION ON DELIVERY
`
`
`
`if YES, enter delivery address below:
`
`D N0
`
`El
`
`El Return Receipt for
`
`Dfmfél £1)?’/00/Zv Cfllenk
`3. ServiceType
`L(‘§‘Cu‘fl("Ul"LL‘§é('
`'
`W’ ElCert1'fiedMail° ElPnon'tyMailB(prBss
`_
`I505)
`l'_'l insured Mail
`l:I Collecton Delivery I
`I I . ' 4. Reshic1_ed£‘leIivery?(E2draFee)
`ElYes
`+23
`
`‘ I
`2. Article Numb
`(Transfer fiom senrice Iabefl
`
`
`_
`
`ps Form 3811, July 2013
`
`_ _:-.3\,__"
`Domestic Ftatum
`
`-
`
`-
`
`"‘
`
`SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION
`
`I Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
`item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
`I Print your name and address on the reverse
`so that we can return the card to you.
`I Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
`or on the front if space permits.
`
`COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY
`
`D. is delivery address different from item 1? El Yes
`If YES, enter delivery address below:
`El No
`
`
`
`“ 32”“ (La!
`J1. ArticleAddressed:::
`
`I
`Dfi7;D/flea/gbé
`DflllxllL€‘L
`
`
`ll5:. (Telly? Wearecl, 3. El Cerfified Mail”
`7 N (CH: fdk)
`I
`El Registered
`ElReturnReceiptff"Merche
`'=ee
`El collect on Delivery
`El lnsuIed'Mail
`‘ ‘
`1-
`_
`"H _
`1 .1) ‘ /
`4. Restricted Delivery? (.5ri:a"&ae)'
`[_‘,| Yes
`2. Article urnb
`
`‘
`
`I
`
`I: Priority Mail Exp ss“'
`
`rfransrerfmmservlcelabei
`PS Form 3311, July 2013
`
`..r,U1I,+ BLED Dual
`uumestlc Return Receipt
`
`t+a|=]=|
`
`[=lj[,-fl
`
`
`
`Cm _3
`
`
`
`

`
`Appeal: l4~1036
`
`Doc: 22
`
`Filed: 03/10/2014
`
`Pg: 3 of 15
`
`‘|ROBERTA S. BREN; OBLON SPIVAK; TERESA STANEK REA; LINDA M. KING
`Defendants - Appellees
`
`1
`
`FRAP 35 & 40, LOC. R. 40(0), FRAP 41, LOC. R. 41, PETITION FOR
`REHEARING EN BANC AT THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
`FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND MOTION TO STAY THE MANDATE
`SETS FORTH GOOD OR PROBABLE CAUSE FOR A STAY;CHALLENGE
`TO JURISDICTION FRCP 60. RELIEF FROM IUDGMENT OR ORDER
`EXCEEDING JURISDICTION. RULE 4001. RELIEF FROM AUTOMATIC
`STAY; PROHIBITING OR CONDITIONION THE USE, SALE, OR LEASE OF
`PROPERTY; REGISTRATION NO. 3431651, SERIAL NO. 76477503.
`
`1. A MATERIAL FACTUAL OR JUDGIVIENT WAS
`
`OVERLOOKED;
`
`28 U.S. Code § 1292 - Interlocutory decisions
`
`Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d) of this section, the courts of appeals shall have
`jurisdiction of appeals from:
`(1) Interlocutory orders of the district courts of the United States, the United States District Court
`for the District of the Canal Zone, the District Court of Guam, and the District Court ofthe
`Virgin Islands, or ofthe judges thereof, granting, continuing, modifying, refusing or dissolving
`injunctions, or refusing to dissolve or modify injunctions, except where a direct review may be
`had in the Supreme Court;
`(2)Inter1ocutory orders appointing receivers, or refusing orders to wind up receiverships or to
`take steps to accomplish the purposes thereof, such as directing sales or other disposals of
`PTOPGITY;
`(3) Interlocutory decrees of such district courts or the judges thereof determining the rights and
`liabilities of the parties to admiralty cases in which appeals from final decrees are allowed.
`(b) When a district judge, in making in a civil action an order not otherwise appealable under this
`section, shall be of the opinion that such order involves a controlling question of law as to which
`there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order
`may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation, he shall so state in writing in
`such order. The Court of Appeals which would ‘have jurisdiction of an appeal of such action may
`thereupon, in its discretion, permit an appeal to be taken from such order, if application is made
`
`”
`
`. rZl,5e"i(§_ ./*'
`
`ll
`
`'\
`
`I
`
`1/
`
`'
`
`iii‘ Jfliif
`
`13/3 /14
`
`

`
`Appeal: l4—1036
`
`Doc: 22
`
`Filed: 03/10/2014
`
`Pg: 4 of 15
`
`to it within ten days after the entry of the order: Provided, however, That application for an
`appeal hereunder shall not stay proceedings in the district court unless the district judge or the
`Court of Appeals or ajudge thereofshall so order.
`(c) The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit shall have exclusive jurisdiction—
`(1) of an appeal from an interlocutory order or decree described in subsection (a) or (b) ofthis
`section in any case over which the court would have jurisdiction of an appeal under section 1295
`of this title; and
`(2) of an appeal from a judgment in a civil action for patent infringement which would otherwise
`be appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and is final except for
`an accounting.
`
`B.
`
`2. The opinion/order conflicts with a decision of the U.S.SUPREl\/[E COURT,
`THIS COURT, OR ANOTHER COURT OF APPEALS, AND TIE
`CONFLICT WAS NOT ADDRESS:
`——
`A. Judgment is a void iudgment if court that rendered ‘judgment tacked
`iurisdiction of the subiect matter, or of the parties, or acted in a manner
`inconsistent with due process, Fed. Rules Civ. Proc., Rule 60(b)(4), 28
`U.S.C.A.; U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 5 —- Klugh v. U.S.. 620 F.Supp. 892 {D.S.C. 1985
`)B.. On certiorari this Court may not review guestions of fact. Brown 1/.
`Blanchard, 39 Mich 790. It is not at libetty to determine disputed facts [Hyde 1;.
`Nelson, 11 Mich 353), nor to review the weight of the evidence. Linn v. Roberts,
`15 Mich 443', Lynch v. People, 16 Mich 472. Certiorarl ls an aggrogrlate remedy
`to get rid of ma void judgment one which there is no evidence to sustaln.})]
`Lake Shore 8. Michl an Southern Rallwa Co. 1/. Hunt 39 Mich 469.
`0- IO/I8 5? Watts v. KRMGH. 5oii>/Qervté Cc)W“\‘T cl‘ /ViIC°/H19/4M7‘
`92 Ma was: Q04/,3$4VVlidl/1.51"?
`3. The case INVOLES ONE OR MORE QUESTIONS OF EXCEPTIONAL IMPORTANCE;
`
`i
`
`28 U.S. Code § 2403 - Intervention by United
`States or a State; constitutional question
`
`a) In any action, suit or proceeding in a court of the United States to which the
`United States or any agency, officer or employee thereof is not a party, wherein the
`constitutionality of any Act of Congress affecting the public interest is drawn in
`question, the court shall certify such fact to the Attorney General, and shall permit
`the United States to intervene for presentation of evidence, if evidence is otherwise
`admissible in the case, and for argument on the question of constitutionality. The
`United States shall, subj ect to the applicable provisions of law, have all the rights
`of a party and be subject to all liabilities of a party as to court costs to the extent
`/./
`
`<':;':::=~<
`
`r""
`2... ,,
`».J»¢ua
`
`
`
`-*1‘ it
`4.; ‘lavi.
`
`
`
`

`
`Appeal: 14-1036
`
`Doc: 22
`
`Filed: 03/10/2014
`
`Pg: 5 of 15
`
`necessary for a proper presentation of the facts and law relating to the question of
`constitutionality.
`(b) In any action, suit, or proceeding in a court of the United States to which a
`State or any agency, officer, or employee thereof is not a party, wherein the
`constitutionality of any statute of that State affecting the public interest is drawn in
`question, the court shall certify such fact to the attorney general of the State, and
`shall permit the State to intervene for presentation of evidence, if evidence is
`otherwise admissible in the case, and for argument on the question of
`constitutionality. The State shall, subject to the applicable provisions of law, have
`all the rights of a party and be subject to all liabilities of a party as to court costs to
`the extent necessary for a proper presentation of the facts and law relating to the
`question of constitutionality.
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`03/ 53 /2014 the foregoing document was served on all parties or their counsel of
`record through the CM/ECF system if they are registered users or, if they are not,
`by serving a true and correct copy at the addresses listed below:
`
`Date Filed: 1 1/05/2013
`
`Jury Demand: None
`Nature of Suit: 840 Trademark
`Jurisdiction: Federal Question
`
`Potter v. Bren et al
`Assigned to: District Judge Claude M. Hilton
`Referred to: Magistrate Judge Ivan D. Davis
`Case in other court: 4th Circuit, 14-01036
`Cause: 1511121 Trademark Infringement
`
`represented by Isaac A. Potter, Jr.
`5503 S. Tampa Avenue
`Orlando, FL 32839
`407-217-3120
`
`PRO SE
`
`represented by Robert Carter Mattson
`24 v l:7l,4,7
`
`/
`
`1
`
`/ ,-a
`i
`
`Plaintiff
`Isaac A. Potter, Jr.
`
`II
`
`;‘\;
`
`Defendant
`
`Roberta S. Bren
`r
`”\_
`
`at
`
`

`
`Appeal: 144036
`
`Doc: 22
`
`Filed: 03/10/2014
`
`Pg: 6 of 15
`
`Oblon Spivak McC1el1and Maier &
`Neustadt LLP
`1940 Duke St
`
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`(703) 412-6466
`Email: rmattson@ob1on.com
`LEAD A TTORNEY
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`Katherine Dorothy Cappaert
`Oblon Spivak McClelland Maier &
`Neustadt PC
`
`1940 Duke St
`
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`703-413-3000
`
`Fax: 703-413-2220
`Email: kcappae1t@ob1on.com
`ATTORNEY T0 BE NOTICED
`
`Lindsay Jane Kile
`Oblon Spivak McC1elland Maier &
`Neustadt PC
`
`1940 Duke St
`
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`703-413-3000
`
`Fax: 703-413-2220
`
`Email: 1ki1e@oblon.com
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`represented by Robert Carter Mattson
`(See above for address)
`LEAD ATTORNEY
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`Katherine Dorothy Cappaert
`(See above for address)
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`Lindsay Jane Kile
`(See above for address)
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`represented by Benjamin Todd Hickman
`US Attorney's Office (Alexandria)
`1/
`
`r*~;x 14 4
`
`1
`
`i /'8//J61
`
`(J5.<22)
`
`Defendant
`Oblon Spivak
`
`Defendant
`
`Teresa Stanek Rea
`
`5»
`
`.(
`I
`
`""'-s.
`
`4:6 as
`
`.»
`
`car.
`
`~
`
`1
`:4’
`-/;;IIl‘
`i 6; V9 —
`
`

`
`55 ex)
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`I HEREBY CERTIFY ON 3/20 2014 THE FOREGOING DOCUMENT RM@4001 I
`( eE—L.A.w) WAS SERVED ON ALL PARTIES ON
`THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD BY SERVING A TRUE AND
`CORRECT COPY AT THE ADDRESS LISTED BELOW:
`
`DefeI_IdaI_I_§ I
`Roberta S. Bren
`
`M2122:
`
`Oblon Spivak
`
`(C‘4¥a~24>/
`
`\_C_‘;‘.><;I
`
`Cf|:In}'ZI_FI ' I‘.
`
`(X'u';l)
`
`.-E.1e.Iq I1 afiqunog afiumo 59: 3|,
`
`i='LEIE.n"LE.FEU
`
`represented by Robert Carter Mattson
`Oblcm Spivak Meclelland Maier &
`Neustadt LLP
`'
`1940 Duke St
`Alexandria,‘ VA 22314
`(703) 412-6466
`_
`Email: rmattson@oblon.com
`LEAD ATTORNEY
`AYTORNEI’ TOBE NOIYCED
`
`Katherine Dorothy Cappaert
`Oblon Spivak Meclelland Maier &.
`' Neustadt PC
`1940 Duke St
`
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`703-413-3000
`Fax: 703-413-2220
`
`Email: keappaert@ohlon.com
`A TIDRNEY TO BE NOIICED
`
`Lindsay Jane Kile
`Oblon Spivak Mcclelland Meier &
`Neustadt PC
`1940 Duke St
`
`Alexandria. VA 22314
`703-413-3000
`Fax: 703-413-2220
`
`Email: 1ki1e@oh1on.com
`ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`represented by Robert Carter Mattson
`(See above for address)
`LEAD ATTORNEY
`A TTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
`
`
`)EI<:1flz’Z'c'*/I’0
`
`/
`
`

`
`CERTIFY ON 3/CZN/20 «
`
`‘
`
`
`,PUBLICNOTARY
`
`.
`
`In
`
`K 1"
`
`5503 S. TAMPA AVENUE, ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32839, PHONE- 407-127-
`3120, EMAIL: ipotter2000@yahoo.com
`
`Umsiefl 5, 0%};-Claek
`)/(‘$1
`40f
`a_[57g
`C:‘ ’ P?
`_
`7//7 Mb‘?035ddr0
`Roam ‘RE?
`PW*jQj)“¥Aj7%m‘3¢Z@484
`C L~?J;2*7§-QM %p<(Q5£g)Q75-%7g
`CC4‘F¢~/4-1879)
`
`-‘VJ?-“3I!'l
`
`-":-TI-UWUCI 9E'UE'JlJ£E5 E L
`
`# L U Z E L Z f SD
`
`

`
`Appeal: 14-1036
`
`DOC: 22
`
`Filed: 03/10/2014
`
`Pg: 14 Of 15
`
`State of Florida
`
`GENERAL AFFIDAVIT
`
`BEFORE ME, the
`
`County of ____0RANGE
`
`__
`before whom ajfidaviz‘ is sworn], on this
`of* MARCH
`[:1
`
`[name ofNotary
`_/:)7 WC
`[day ofmonth] day
`_, personally appeared
`[name ofafiiant],
`‘/
`known to m to be a credible person and of lawful age, who being by me first duly
`sworn, on
`§‘gE3
`[his or her] oath, deposes and says:
`
`,;201
`
`
`
`I
`
`"
`
`.1 .
`‘
`_
`In-_
`V-.
`_
`__ _:
`_
`[. ' forth afiaI1t'ls'srat':m§A . '
`.-
`
`1 I
`
`:
`
`..
`
`.
`
`:-
`
`I
`
`§
`
`., 1..
`
`11
`L /1'
`_
`-- my I"
`[sre cg ’ ‘s =
`ISAAC A. POTTER JR
`
`[typed name ofafiant]
`
`filderwré
`
`55(.Z’3 S
`[address of ajfiant, line 1]
`ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32839, 407-217-3120, EMAIL:
`ipotter2000@yaho0.com
`[address ofafiiant, line 2]
`
`State of Florid
`
`lg %
`County of
`Sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me this
`
`‘$14 day of
`
`

`
`Appeal: 14-1036
`
`Doc: 22
`
`Filed: 03/10/2014
`
`Pg: 15 of 15
`
`_i/Ntvoi/1 _,
`
`/Zbikzgear),by I
`
`(name of p
`
`nr
`
`aki
`
`statement).
`
`(Signature of Notary Public — State of Florida)
`
`Qjurtam x'iLLi7W i
`(Print, Type, or Stamp Commissioned Name ofNotary Public) ,-
`Personally Known
`I
`OR oduced Identification
`‘
`i
`Type ofIdentificationProduced ;’i L
`too - 1101- Q17-1816B
`
`MyEu?i1nr':i:gn:ii:aEuE::::.a:uaa
`i
`/V *2,DZ'L
`l‘«l::-Iv:yrEi"tiEI:~’i|:..°.lai1u1:fr-":n:i:!1|
`7 ‘
`1
`
`€K( M5
`
`
`
`5*‘
`
`
`
`i
`
`urrcuau
`
`«
`
`.
`
`'