Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`ESTTA1021282
`12/09/2019
`
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`Filing date:
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Proceeding
`
`92068021
`
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`
`Filer's Name
`
`Filer's email
`
`Signature
`
`Date
`
`Attachments
`
`Defendant
`Sports America, Inc.
`
`CATHY MITCHELL
`SPORTS AMERICA INC
`191 BRATENAHL ROAD
`BRATENAHL, OH 44108
`UNITED STATES
`cm1864@gmail.com, cathy@cathymitchelllaw.com, cam@cathrynamitchell.com
`561-406-8535
`
`Other Motions/Papers
`
`cathy mitchell
`
`cathy@cathymitchelllaw.com
`
`/cathy mitchell/
`
`12/09/2019
`
`APRIL 2017 CZAR CLOTHING T SHIRTS TWEET.pdf(151306 bytes )
`14 nov 2019 CZAR JEANS TWEET ABOUT WEBSITE.pdf(5001357 bytes )
`ZELLEM 2 DEC 9 2019 EXH.pdf(995542 bytes )
`ZELLEM 9 DEC 2019 EXHIBITS TO BAD FAITH INFRINGEMENT
`1.pdf(3343378 bytes )
`10 05 p EST ZELLEM BAD FAITH INFRINGEMENT WITH EXHIBIT NUMBERS
`TTAB.pdf(696101 bytes )
`
`

`

`
`
`01
`
`112
`
`017
`
`CD
`
`Czar Clothing @CzarClothing - Apr 14, 2017
`Dear Followers,thanks 4 following. I'm personally working on design:
`clothing. T—shirts lst then other Items. #Fashion #EDM
`
`-'
`
`r
`
`l CZHR
`
`CLOTHING
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`“QM
`
`‘Sia #Russiian
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`‘
`
`“
`
`UH
`
`\
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`czarinacllm
`#Fasmicari:
`
`V
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`£A M i t c h e l l <cathy@cathymitchelllaw
`com>
`To. Vincent Allen <allen@cclaw.
`com>
`
`Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 3:13 PM
`
`redoing saWyS'are notavaitebfe"6
`
`3 ™SSage for you
`
`V™"" voicemail. It
`
`went right to voicemail and the AI
`
`It is Tuesday, 3 December 2019 at approximately 5 13 pm EST.
`
`Please return my call at your earliest convenience.
`
`

`

`CA Mitchell <cathy@cathymitchelllaw.com>
`To: Vincent Allen <allen@cclaw.com>
`
`Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 11:57 AM
`
`Mr. Allen,
`
`I have just left a physician appointment and have another this afternoon. I have many appointments per week related to
`the injury about which I advised you in March/April 2018.
`
`plan to call you in the next 30 minutes or so to be sure there is time to speak.
`
`Please be prepared to discuss my client's motion for summary judgment which purportedly gave rise to your claim you
`need information, as well as the issues surrounding your client's application for CZAR JEANS.
`
`Please also be prepared to advise of any use your client or any affiliate or party related to or connected to your client is
`making or has made regarding CZAR for clothing.
`
`C Mitchell
`561 406 8535
`
`CA Mitchell <cathy@cathymitchelllaw.com>
`To: Vincent Allen <vallen@cclaw.com>
`
`Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 12:30 PM
`
`Mr Allen I just called you.
`
`There is a lot of material to cover. I would like to know what use your client or any related party is making, or has made, of
`CZAR for clothing. I do not see a response. I thought you said you were wide open this week, you have not been
`available twice when I have called.
`
`I have a medical appointment this afternoon, I have been in and out of urgent care over the holiday.
`
`430 central gives very little time given my appointment. I prefer to speak sooner. Please call as soon as possible. Please
`be prepared to address the issues I have raised.
`
`C Mitchell
`
`

`

`CA Mitchell <cathy@cathymitchelllaw.com>
`To: Vincent Allen <allen@cclaw.com>
`
`Mr Allen:
`
`Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 1:25 PM
`
`This is the third request for information regarding any use your client or any affiliate may be making of CZAR for any
`
`clothing item.
`
`You have failed to respond to my multiple requests.
`
`Further, after stating you are available "all week," you were conveniently not available yesterday afternoon, you failed to
`
`respond to my phone call yesterday, and you were not available this afternoon.
`
`Given your history in this case, I am concerned this is more evidence of bad faith.
`
`I am not speaking with you by phone until I receive a written response to my question regarding use, in writing, with dates
`
`of any use and any goods on which your client or an affiliate may have use of CZAR.
`
`Given your failure to answer my two calls after claiming you are available "all week"; your 3-time failure to respond to
`what should be a simple question, and my sense there is bad faith and potential trademark infringement by your client,
`
`the call scheduled for 430 pm Central today is off.
`
`In the event trademark infringement is discovered, this is further evidence of bad faith and in direct violation of what we
`
`understand to be the requirements of the TTAB in this case.
`
`In that case, as well, you should govern yourself accordingly.
`
`I await your response to the Motion I filed this morning.
`
`C Mitchell
`
`IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE
`Under regulations issued by the U.S. Treasury, to the extent that
`tax advice is contained in this communication (or any attachment
`or enclosure hereto), you are advised that such tax advice is not
`intended or written to be used, and cannot be used by you, or any
`other party to whom this correspondence is shown, for the
`purpose of: (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue
`Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending the tax
`advice addressed herein to any other party.
`
`This message is intended only for the designated recipient(s). It
`may contain confidential or proprietary information and may be
`subject to the attorney-client privilege or other confidentiality
`protections. If you are not a designated recipient, you may not
`review, copy or distribute this message. If you receive this in
`error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this
`
`message. Thank you.
`
`

`

`CA Mitchell <cathy@cathymitchelllaw.com>
`
`A"dreW
`
`Advise your client to govern themselves accordingly.
`
`C Mitchell
`
`

`

`&SpdN«W-l-
`
`20 I
`
`

`

`i
`
`CZAR
`
`1 message
`
`COUNSELTOGLOBALBUSINESS <cathy@cathymitchelllaw.com>
`
`Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 AM
`
`To: allen@cclaw.com
`
`Mr. Allen,
`
`Tried calling your office several times Friday.
`
`Available to speak today, Monday, between 11 am and 2 pm EST.
`
`Cathy Mitchell
`
`561 406 8535
`
`COUNSELTOGLOBALBUSINESS <cathy@cathymitchelllaw.com>
`
`To: allen@cclaw.com
`^^"Cathryn A. Mitchell
`
`y
`
`Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 8:47 AM
`
`Mr. Allen,
`
`You said your client "Zellem Enterprises" wants to use a
`
`mark incorporating the word "CZAR" on jeans. You said they
`
`have no use.
`
`As promised, we spoke with our client.
`
`Our client does not consent to this use.
`
`"C7iR" ha* heen used for decades in connection with our client.
`i
`>
`As I mentioned separately, and you seemed to know, CZAR has been
`
`Cathy Mitchell
`
`561 406 8535
`
`Vincent Allen <allen@cclaw.com>
`To: COUNSELTOGLOBALBUSINESS <cathy@cathymitchelllaw.com>
`
`Cc: Jana Sanders <jsanders@cclaw.com>
`
`Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 10:18 AM
`
`Ms. Mitchell —
`
`I do not believe we have received a response to my email below. To the extent your client is still using the mark,
`
`would you be willing to provide us with evidence of that use?
`
`Best Regards,
`Vincent Allen, PARTNER
`
`

`

`Co^ip*
`
`2-
`
`"pic tec
`
`a^TTD K)S
`
`

`

`Docket Number: GNZEL.00506
`
`Tradema
`
`DECLARATION ^ j
`
`r T*
`
`The undersigned declares that he is authorized to make this declaration on behalf of the
`
`applicant; that said applicant believes it is entitled to use the mark in commerce as specified in die
`
`application; that said applicant has a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce and had a
`
`bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce as of the application filing date; that to the best ot
`
`his knowledge and belief no other person, firm, corporation, organization or association has the
`
`right to use said mark in commerce, either in the identical form or in such near resemblance thereto^
`
`as may be likely, when applied to the goods or services of such other person, firm, corporation,
`
`organization or association to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive; that all
`
`statements made herein of his own knowledge are true and that all statements made on information
`
`and belief are believed to be true: and farther, that these statements were made with the knowledge
`
`that willful false statements and the like are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under
`
`Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code and that such willful false statements may
`
`jeopardize the validity of the application or any registration resulting therefrom.
`
`Dated this
`
`day of C
`
`2017.
`
`' ZELLEM ENTERPRISES, INC.
`
`| /! ^ '}
`
`By:
`
`(-
`T
`Nicholas Zellem
`PrpciHent
`u
`
`Page 2 of 4
`
`

`

`Q
`Docket Number: GNZEL. 00505 V\*oev^ A I (<.» ,
`£& L4. CLfrvt''^6'1
`£2 AC-
`
`Q ja;lc it
`
`Trademark
`
`DECLARATION
`
`The undersigned declares that he is authorized to make this declaration on behalf of the
`
`applicant; that said applicant believes it is entitled to use the mark in commerce as specified in the
`
`application; that said applicant has a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce and had a
`
`bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce as of the application filing date; that to the best of
`
`his knowledge and belief no other person, firm, corporation, organization or association has the
`
`right to use said mark in commerce, either in the identical form or in such near resemblance thereto
`
`as may be likely, when applied to the goods or services of such other person, firm, corporation,
`
`organization or association to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive; that ail
`
`statements made herein of his own knowledge are true and that all statements made on information
`
`and belief are believed to be true; and further, that these statements were made with the knowledge
`
`that willful false statements and the like are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under
`
`Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code and that such willful false statements may
`
`jeopardize the validity of the application or any registration resulting therefrom.
`
`Dated this j * day of
`
`2017.
`
`ZELLEM ENTERPRISES, INC.
`
`Nicholas Zellem
`President
`
`Page 2 of 4
`
`

`

`- &*<**•+«
`
`Jf<U
`
`•jsijv - <1 Dec 2o\°[
`
`la tf|*
`
`

`

`CA Mitchell <cathy@cathymitchelllaw.com>
`To: Vincent Allen <allen@cclaw.com>
`^athy Mitchell
`
`Cathy Mitchell*
`
`Mr. Allen:
`
`Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 2:50 PM
`
`A call appears to have come in from your office, not from you personally, this afternoon, Thursday 21 November 2019.
`
`I understand you are counsel of record in this matter.
`
`Please ensure contact with me is directly from you so there is no question the attorney responsible for this matter is the
`party communicating with me.
`
`I expect the call was regarding an Order from the TTAB entered almost 2 weeks ago.
`
`This appears to be the first call received from anyone in your office since the Order was entered. The call apparently was
`not from the attorney responsible for filing a Petition for Cancellation containing what I advised you years aqo was false
`a
`information.
`
`Nonetheless you not only filed a Petition for Cancellation containing what has been repeatedly identified as knowingly
`false information but your client appears to have falsely executed an application to register a mark which you personally
`knew was owned by a third party and which I told you was in use years ago.
`
`Notwithstanding the above, someone from your office appears to have stated someone from your office sent an email.
`
`We will look for an email from your office and endeavor to respond at our earliest convenience next week.
`
`C Mitchell
`561.406.8535
`
`

`

`i nu, inuv ii,
`
`CA Mitchell <cathy@cathymitchelllaw.com>
`
`To: Vincent Allen <allen@cclaw.com>
`
`Mr Allen:
`
`Please excuse our calculation error.
`
`We said the TTAB Order denying your
`
`motion was entered "almost 2 weeks ago.
`
`This was incorrect.
`
`The Order was apparently entered MORE THAN two weeks ago, or 15 days to be prec.se.
`
`CMitchell
`561 406 8535
`
`

`

`GM i l
`
`byCiOOglc
`
`CZAR, Mike Fratello
`
`Cathy Mitchell <cathy@cathymitchelllaw.com>
`
`CA Mitchell <cathy@cathymitchelllaw.com>
`
`To: Vincent Allen <allen@cclaw.com>
`
`Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 2:51 PM
`
`Mr. Allen:
`
`See attached and below.
`
`C Mitchell
`561 406 8535
`
`MEMORANDUM
`
`28 November 2019 (Thanksgiving Day)
`
`To Vincent Allen Esq., attorney for "The Czar of Vinyl" Disk Jockey
`
`FR C Mitchell
`
`Re The CZAR, Mike Fratello - TTAB Denial ofZellem "Motion to Compel"
`
`Mr. Allen:
`
`We note an Order was entered in this case by Judge Stanley of the TTAB on 6 November 2019, 16 days before anyone
`from your office picked up the phone to attempt to contact the undersigned.
`
`1.
`
`Summary Judgment filed 19 December 2018 (originally September 2018) — No Response
`
`To date Zellem has filed no substantive response to this Motion, and has instead been stonewalling this case, running
`up fees for Sports America and usurping executive time, for more than one year.
`
`2.
`
`Incorrect Procedure
`
`"FN1 Petitioner seeks to compel responses to its interrogatories, document requests, and requests for admission. 33
`TTABVUE. To the extent that Petitioner was dissatisfied with Respondent's responses and objections to its requests
`for admission. Petitioner should have filed a motion to test the sufficiency of the response, not a motion to compel. See
`TBMP §§ 523.01 (2019) ("The motion to compel procedure is not applicable to requests for admission."); 524.01.
`Accordingly, as it applies to Petitioner's requests for admission, the Board construes the motion to compel as a motion
`to test the sufficiency of Respondent's response to Petitioner's requests for admission. See Trademark Rule 2.120(i)
`(1)"
`
`Failure to exercise good faith to "resolve differences "
`
`3.
`
`a.
`
`Pp. 2: A party seeking to compel discovery must "show that it has made a good faith effort to resolve the
`issues presented in the motion, and that the parties were unable to resolve their differences."
`
`Zellem has made no effort to "resolve our differences." You sent an email with portions of the Order. "Resolving
`differences" refers to compromise, not demands and bullying.
`
`Definition of resolve/settle differences: to stop disagreeing, arguing, etc.(with each other)
`
`(Merriam Webster)
`
`

`

`re-solve /n'zt>lvn'za:lv, n'zrxlv/ verb
`
`1 [transitive] to find a satisfactory way of settling a disagreement, dispute etc
`
`(https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/resolve)
`
`pp. 3: "Similarly, a motion to determine the sufficiency of an answer or objection to a request for admission
`b.
`"must be supported by a written statement from the moving party that such party or the attorney therefor has made a
`good faith effort, by conference or correspondence, to resolve with the other party or the attorney therefor the
`issues presented in the motion and has been unable to reach agreement." Trademark Rule 2.120(i)( 1); see also TBMP
`§ 524.02.
`
`You failed to do this previously. There is no indication this is your intention now, given your 16-day delay in calling
`the undersigned, days before the Thanksgiving Holiday, then demanding a call on the Tuesday of Thanksgiving week,
`see "I need to schedule a call," and "we haven't heard from you (which was false)," Allen Correspondence,
`Attachment 1.
`
`I read your correspondence as giving my client one choice: respond to your demands, as is. This is not an "attempt to
`resolve differences." This is more bullying, the Modus Operandi for 3+ years in this matter.
`
`pp. 3: A party seeking discovery has a duty to contact the adverse party to ascertain why it has received no
`c.
`response to its discovery requests and to determine whether the matter can be resolved amicably
`
`You did not do this before filing the Motion
`
`You did not do this now
`
`I see this as more evidence of bad faith.
`
`The requirement is to attempt to resolve the dispute, not send frantic, misleading correspondence beginning
`d.
`15 days - more than two weeks - after a TTAB Order denying your motion.
`
`Order pp 3, 4:
`
`"...Rather, the point is to investigate the possibility of resolving the dispute. Although the reason why no
`discovery responses were served can be part — possibly an important part — of the discussion, it may be
`irrelevant to resolving the dispute in many cases. Regardless, the good faith efforts of the parties should be
`directed to understanding differences and actually investigating ways in which to resolve the dispute.
`Where it is apparent that the effort toward resolution is incomplete, establishing the good faith effort that is a
`prerequisite for a motion to compel necessitates that the inquiring party engage in additional effort toward
`ascertaining and resolving the substance of the dispute."
`
`(Emphasis supplied)
`
`Please note the following instructions from the TTAB:
`
`"They should able to resolve, or at least significantly narrow, the disputed issues."
`
`"...good faith effort [is required] to satisfy the legitimate discovery needs of its adversary."
`
`I am personally at a loss to see how this case is legitimate.
`
`I have never witnessed a matter in which a party/their attorney
`
`(1) Discovered a direct conflict in a search - you said you did so in 2016, 3 years ago;
`
`(2) Called counsel to inquire of use - 2016 - you did so, 3 years ago;
`
`(3) Was advised in writing and orally of use - 2016 - you were so advised, 3 years ago;
`
`(4) Tells opposing counsel he knows of use and ownership by Sports America but "client likes [the Czar Mark of Mike
`Fratello]" - 2016;
`
`(5) Files a trademark application with a client's declaration knowingly falsely stating no other party has superior rights;
`
`(6) Uses the above false attestation to bootstrap itself into standing in a cancellation proceeding;
`
`(7) Uses the improperly-filed cancellation proceeding in an attempt to force an assignment of rights of CZAR for t-
`shirts under the guise of a "settlement agreement" (see infra, Cancellation Responses, from conduct in August 2018)
`and to run up legal fees for Respondent to the point of apparently hoping Respondent will abandon its registrations for
`
`

`

`lack of desire to spend thousands of dollars defending a bogus claim. In any conversation, please be prepared to
`explain why a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing is not appropriate in this matter, if that is your position.
`
`I had a scheduled medical procedure on Tuesday (two days ago) related to the incident about which you personally
`showed no concern in March and April 2018. You may recall in or around April 2018 I was required to request TTAB
`intervention - when I was injured - because you ignored my calls and emails, then refused the courtesy of an
`extension.
`
`You can see why I did not bother to advise you of my medical issues this week. You waited 16 days to call me after
`the TTAB issued its November 6, 2019 Order, knowing it was days before Thanksgiving week when you finally began
`your frantic communications.
`
`In another case I would say it was an oversight. In this case, in light of your conduct for the past 3 years, I would
`opine it was intentional, to cause as much disruption and inconvenience to me and my client as possible.
`
`You have succeeded.
`
`As for your 2+ week delay, it was my sense anyone who cared about their case or their client would have picked up the
`phone immediately, on November 6 or 7, 2019, particularly given the language of the Order directing you to do so, and
`denying your Motion. You can understand why it was my understanding your client elected to - finally - abandon its
`lawsuit over an application it had no right to file, having not heard from you for 2+weeks. I will attempt to reach my
`client, however I may not be able to do so until next week given the timing. Please advise of your personal availability
`to speak later next week. Please also be prepared to respond to the above, as well as why your client has not yet
`withdrawn this cancellation action which your client filed on the basis of a knowingly false application declaration.
`
`* * *
`
`IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE
`Under regulations issued by the U.S. Treasury, to the extent that
`tax advice is contained in this communication (or any attachment
`or enclosure hereto), you are advised that such tax advice is not
`intended or written to be used, and cannot be used by you, or any
`other party to whom this correspondence is shown, for the
`purpose of: (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue
`Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending the tax
`advice addressed herein to any other party.
`
`This message is intended only for the designated recipient(s). It
`may contain confidential or proprietary information and may be
`subject to the attorney-client privilege or other confidentiality
`protections. If you are not a designated recipient, you may not
`review, copy or distribute this message. If you receive this in
`error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this
`message. Thank you.
`
`® 6 NOV 2019 TTAB ORDER DENYING ZELEM MOTION MIKE FRATELLO CZAR MEMO.pdf
`J 585K
`
`

`

`First filed 2 57 EST 9 Dec 2019 – without Exhibit Numbers
`
`IN THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD OF THE UNITED STATES
`PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Proceeding No. 92068021
`
`Zellem Enterprises, Inc.,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Sports America, Inc.,
`
`Respondent.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`
`EMERGENT MOTION FOR TTAB INSTRUCTIONS
`IN LIGHT OF ZELLEM INTENTIONAL TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT
`
`
`
`Sports America, Inc. took the unusual step of submitting a
`
`DRAFT, updated with Exhibit references, in light of the TTAB’s
`
`Order of 9 December 2019, minutes prior to the draft being
`
`submitted. This paper relates to the Motion for Clarification
`
`requesting the TTAB provide guidance. This revision contains
`
`inserted Exhibit numbers for emails.
`
`See CZAR on Shopify and CZAR CLOTHING on Shopify submitted
`
`with DRAFT.
`
`See April 2017 Tweet of CZAR CLOTHING about t-shirts,
`
`attached.
`
`See November 14, 2019 Tweet of CZAR CLOTHING announcing CZAR
`
`CLOTHING website, attached.
`
`+++
`
`Sports America Inc. (Sports America) respectfully submits
`
`this Emergent Motion for TTAB Instructions in light of Zellem’s
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`apparent knowing and intentional trademark infringement using
`
`materials obtained by Zellem in “discovery,” apparently on the
`heels of the Judge Stanley’s 6 November TTAB Order:
`Zellem’s 3-Year Pattern of Deception, Vincent Allen, Esq. 2016
`
`
`
`At the heart of the dispute between the parties is the three-
`
`year pattern of deception by counsel for Zellem, Vincent Allen,
`
`Esq. and the apparent facilitation of the filing of multiple
`
`fraudulently-attested trademark applications by Zellem (Composite
`
`Exhibit 1). The pattern of deception and subterfuge continues
`
`through today with the conduct of Zellem counsel in connection
`
`with this TTAB proceeding.
`
`2016 Petitioner - Statements of Counsel
`
`“Based on the differences in the marks in the specimen provided by your client and the channels
`of trade, we are of the view that there probably would be no likelihood of confusion between the
`concurrent use of these marks.” – Vincent Allen, Esq, October 28, 2016
`
`In October 2016 Vincent Allen, Esq. sent the following email
`
`
`
`to the undersigned, claiming his client (unidentified) wanted to
`
`use CZAR on “jeans” and he did not believe there would be any
`likelihood of confusion given the “differences in the marks”:
`
`(Emphasis added):
`
`---------- Forwarded message ---------
`From: Vincent Allen <allen@cclaw.com>
`Date: Fri, Oct 28, 2016, 9:18 AM
`Subject: The CZAR trademark registration
`To: cm1864@gmail.com <cm1864@gmail.com>
`Cc: Jana Sanders <jsanders@cclaw.com>
`
`Dear Ms. Mitchell:
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`I understand that you are the attorney of record for the Sports America, Inc. with respect to Registration
`No. 2116489 for the mark THE CZAR covering certain clothing items. I write because I have a client that
`is interested in using the marks CZAR JEANS and CZAR CLOTHING on jeans and the registration for your
`client came up during our due diligence. Based on the differences in the marks in the specimen provided
`by your client and the channels of trade, we are of the view that there probably would be no likelihood of
`confusion between the concurrent use of these marks.
`
`
`Moreover, we are not able to locate any current uses of the mark by your client. Would you please advise
`whether your client is in fact still using the mark and whether it would have any objection to my client’s
`registration of its own marks in connection with the sale of clothing items? As you know, the trademark
`office does not consider the actual differences in the marks as used in commerce when determining
`likelihood of confusion between word marks. So we might need a coexistence agreement in order for my
`client to obtain a registration although that remains to be seen.
`
`
`Thank you for your attention to this and I look forward to hearing from you.
`
`
`Best Regards,
`Vincent Allen, PARTNER
`
`
`CARSTENS & CAHOON, LLP
`Attorneys & Counselors
`
`
`972.367.2001 | allen@cclaw.com | Website | vCard | Bio
`13760 Noel Road | Suite 900 | Dallas, Texas 75240
`
`
`2016 Confirmation of Use
`
`
`
`
`
`The undersigned called Mr. Allen back numerous times, and
`
`there was no response (Composite Exh. 1)
`
`
`
`As a third-party potential infringer with no rights in CZAR
`
`for clothing in 2016, Mr. Allen appeared to believe he had the
`
`right to obtain use-related information from Respondent regarding
`
`its marks.
`
`
`
`Contrast this with Mr. Allen’s 4 December 2019 refusal to
`
`respond to three inquiries of the undersigned regarding any use
`
`Zellem may be making of CZAR for clothing, claiming such inquiries
`
`are “irrelevant.”
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`
`
`In and around November 2016 the undersigned communicated,
`
`verbally and in writing, to Mr. Vincent Allen, Esq. the CZAR mark
`
`was in use and Respondent did not consent to any “co-existence
`agreement” with Zellem. (Comp. Exhibit 1)
`
`2017 Zellem False Declarations
`
`
`
`In June 2017 Zellem filed federal trademark applications for
`
`CZAR JEANS and CZAR CLOTHING, apparently knowing, through counsel
`
`Vincent Allen, and receiving confirmation from the undersigned, in
`
`writing, Respondent’s CZAR mark was in use (Comp. Exhibit 1, 2
`
`knowingly false declarations).
`
`
`
`Applicant Nicholas Zellem, represented by Vincent Allen,
`
`Esq., made the following attestation:
`
`Trademark/Service Mark Application, Principal Register
`TEAS Plus Application
`Serial Number: 87502695
`Filing Date: 06/23/2017
`To the Commissioner for Trademarks:
`MARK: CZAR JEANS (stylized and/or with design, see below )
`The mark in your application is CZAR JEANS.
`The applicant is not claiming color as a feature of the mark. The
`mark consists of half of a calatrava cross on top of a bottom half
`of a calatrava cross with an open space between them with the words
`CZAR JEANS between the two halves.
`The applicant, Zellem Enterprises, Inc., a corporation of Texas,
`having an address of
` 4048 Seabury Drive
` Dallas, Texas 75287
` United States
`
`requests registration of the trademark/service mark identified
`above in the United States Patent and Trademark Office on the
`Principal Register established by the Act of July 5, 1946 (15
`U.S.C. Section 1051 et seq.), as amended, for the following:
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`For specific filing basis information for each item, you must view
`the display within the Input Table.
` International Class 025: Belts; Jeans; Shirts; Polo
`shirts; T-shirts
`Intent to Use: The applicant has a bona fide intention, and is
`entitled, to use the mark in commerce on or in connection with the
`identified goods/services. (15 U.S.C. Section 1051(b)).
`The applicant's current Attorney Information:
` Vincent J. Allen of Carstens & Cahoon, LLP P.O. Box
`802334
` Dallas, Texas 75380
` United States
` 9723672001(phone)
` 9723672002(fax)
` tmdocketing@cclaw.com (authorized)
`The attorney docket/reference number is GNZEL.00506.
`The applicant's current Correspondence Information:
` Vincent J. Allen
` Carstens & Cahoon, LLP
` P.O. Box 802334
` Dallas, Texas 75380
` 9723672001(phone)
` 9723672002(fax)
` tmdocketing@cclaw.com;allen@cclaw.com (authorized)
`***
`…
`Declaration
`
`Declaration Signature The attached signature image file:
`\\TICRS\EXPORT17\IMAGEOUT17\875\026\87502695\xml1\FTK0003.JPG
`
`Signatory's Name: Nicholas Zellem
`Signatory's Position: President
`Signatory's Phone Number: 9723672001
`Payment Sale Number: 87502695
`Payment Accounting Date: 06/23/2017
`Serial Number: 87502695
`++++
`
`Basis for Emergent Request, Request for Judicial Notice
`
`
`
`On 6 November 2019 The TTAB, Judge Lawrence T Stanley, issued
`
`an order (1) denying Zellem’s Motion to Compel, arising out of a
`56D Motion filed in response to Respondent’s Motion for Summary
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Judgment and (2) instructing the parties to work in good faith to
`
`resolve their issues (the 6 November Order).
`
`
`
`The undersigned read the 6 November Order as an admonishment
`
`of both parties generally to come together, in good faith, and
`
`resolve their differences in this case, in a holistic sense,
`
`including the foundational issues which pervade the parties’
`
`disagreements, in toto.
`
`
`
`The gravamen of the acrimony in this case relates to the
`
`conduct of Attorney Allen in 2016, namely, admitting his client
`
`had no rights nor use in CZAR; admitting he was aware of
`
`Respondent’s registrations; receiving verbal and written
`
`confirmation of use by the undersigned; yet going forward in
`
`apparently facilitating the filing of knowingly-false trademark
`
`applications, in an attempt to “manufacture standing” in this TTAB
`
`proceeding in which additional knowingly-false statements were
`
`made in the Petition for Cancellation.
`
`
`
`In its October 28, 2016 email, Zellem, through counsel Vincent
`
`Allen, Esq., makes what were apparently multiple knowingly false
`
`statements, including
`
`1. Zellem’s use of CZAR would be on “jeans”; and
`
`2.
`
`Zellem would use the mark “CZAR JEANS” with a logo
`
`.
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`As the TTAB can see from Zellem’s infringing website, there are no
`“jeans” for sale. Instead, the website is for athletic wear.
`
`
`
`To the contrary, Zellem apparently read the 6 November Order
`
`as a license to commit willful trademark infringement, in the
`
`apparent final act of unlawful usurpation of Respondent’s rights
`
`in the CZAR mark.
`
`Zellem appears to have announced his infringing website on
`
`November 14, 2019, eight days after the 6 November Order.
`
` The Zellem Infringing “CZAR” clothing line is on Shopify,
`
`the identical platform disclosed by Sports America in its Discovery
`
`Responses.
`
`Upon information and belief, customers have already been
`
`diverted from Respondent’s website to the Infringing Site.
`Zellem’s Knowledge of Sports America’s Registrations and Use
`Zellem’s CZAR application attestations were apparently
`
`
`
`knowingly false in light of information conveyed verbally and in
`
`writing by the undersigned to Vincent Allen, Esq. in 2016, who
`
`stated his client was pursuing C