Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`ESTTA1118356
`
`Filing date:
`
`03/04/2021
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Proceeding
`
`92071109
`
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`
`Filer's Name
`
`Filer's email
`
`Signature
`
`Date
`
`Attachments
`
`Defendant
`Majik Medecine, LLC
`
`BLYNN L SHIDELER
`THE BLK LAW GROUP
`3500 BROOKTREE ROAD, SUITE 200
`WEXFORD, PA 15090
`UNITED STATES
`Primary Email: blynn@blkLawGroup.com
`724-934-5450
`
`Motion to Suspend for Civil Action
`
`Blynn Shideler
`
`Blynn@BLKLawGroup.com
`
`/Blynn L. Shideler/
`
`03/04/2021
`
`OppositiontoMotiontoStayMARCH2021.pdf(83663 bytes )
`EXHIBITFirstRequestforDiscoveryJanuary22FINAL2021.pdf(141643 bytes )
`EXHIBITInitialDisclosurePetitioner.pdf(14250 bytes )
`
`

`

`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`CBDMD, LLC
`
`Plaintiff/Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-v-
`
`Majik Medecine, LLC,
`
`Defendant/ Registrant
`
`
`
`Cancellation Proceeding # 92071109
`
`Registration # 5173264
`
`
`
`
`
`Registrant’s Opposition to Petitioner’s Motion to Stay Proceeding Pending Outcome of
`
`This filing is an opposition to Petitioner’s Motion to Stay Proceeding Pending
`
`Civil Action
`
`Outcome of Civil Action filed February 12, 2021 (paper 33).
`
`This filing is made concurrently with i) a Motion for Summary Judgement and ii) a
`
`Motion to Compel Discovery. The Motion to Compel Discovery relates to Registrants
`
`interrogatories and request for production of documents contained in the “Registrant’s
`
`first request for Admissions, set of Interrogatories and Request for production of
`
`documents directed to Petitioner CBDMD, LLC” (hereinafter Registrant’s First
`
`Request attached hereto as an exhibit) which was properly properly served upon counsel
`
`for Petitioner on January 22, 2021. The Motion to Compel Discovery filing does not
`
`address the Request for Admissions contained in the Registrant’s First Request, which
`
`are deemed admitted by operation of law pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a)(3).
`
`1 | P a g e Cancellation Proceeding No. 92071109
`
`Motion
`
`
`
`
`

`

`These three filings are interrelated but are separated in accordance with the
`
`guidance of TBMP 502.02(b), although the following background is generally repeated
`
`verbatim in all these filings.
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`This action remains a blatant attempt of a multimillion dollar corporation, now
`
`known as cbdMD, Inc (the managing member of the Petitioner1) to usurp the legitimate
`
`prior trademark rights of a smaller competitor.
`
`The Petitioner was formed November 26, 2018 by Level Brands, Inc after Level
`
`Brands, Inc. was advised to cease and desist from using marks confusing similar to the
`
`Registrant’s mark, CBD MD.2 The Petitioner’s very name, CBDMD, LLC (now CBD
`
`Industries LLC), was selected to unfairly usurp the rights of the Registrant and in violation
`
`of federal and state unfair competition laws. The name of the managing member of
`
`Petitioner was changed from Level Brands, Inc. to cbdMD, Inc in the spring of 20193 to
`
`unfairly usurp the rights of the Registrant and in violation of federal and state unfair
`
`competition laws and further at a time well after it was formally advised to cease and
`
`desist from using marks confusing similar to the Registrant’s mark CBD MD and.
`
`The Petitioner filed this cancellation proceeding in bad faith to drive up the legal
`
`fees of the Registrant. Marty Sumachrist, chairman of the Board of Directors and CoCEO
`
`of cbdMD, Inc., made this strategy clear when he sent a text message to a member of
`
`
`1 Admission No.3 of Registrant’s First Request
`2Admission No.2 of Registrant’s First Request
`
`3 Admission No. 11 of Registrant’s First Request
`2 | P a g e Cancellation Proceeding No. 92071109
`
`Motion
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Registrant stating “I hope your shareholders like to write checks to lawyers.”4 The initial
`
`pleadings of the Petitioner were so deficient that the Board noted in the Order of
`
`December 30, 2019 (paper #13 – Granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss on 7 of 9
`
`grounds and denying the motion on two remaining grounds) that the “abundance of
`
`deficiencies in the pleadings appears to demonstrate a lack of reasonable inquiry into the
`
`subject matter.”
`
`The Plaintiff filed a Corrected Amended Complaint which in paragraphs 61-63
`
`baselessly asserted that that the “phrase CBD MD is a commonly used descriptive phrase
`
`that connotes information on products which include CBD as an ingredient” (Emphasis
`
`Added). The Petitioner concludes therein that the “CBD MD mark is incapable of
`
`distinguishing the goods of [Registrant] from the goods of others and therefore cannot
`
`function as a trademark and an indicator of source.” The Petitioner had, and still has, no
`
`basis to support this assertion which was raised in bad faith solely to harass the
`
`Defendant and increase their costs in defending this baseless claim.
`
`The Defendants sought to engage in a discovery conference, in which, in
`
`accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f)(2), “the parties must consider the nature and basis
`
`of their claims.” The Plaintiff further evidenced their bad faith filing of this case and their
`
`complete disinterest in prosecuting the merits of this action when for several months
`
`through November 16, 2020 they failed to cooperate with the Defendant to even schedule
`
`the required Discovery Conference. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 2.120(h)(1) the Defendant
`
`
`4 Admission Nos. 77-78 of Registrant’s First Request
`3 | P a g e Cancellation Proceeding No. 92071109
`
`Motion
`
`
`
`
`

`

`filed a Motion for Sanctions on November 16, 2020 against Plaintiff for its failure to
`
`participate in the required Discovery Conference.
`
`
`
`The Plaintiff’s counsel contacted the undersigned only after the filing of the Motion
`
`for Sanctions. The Parties then hastily conducted an extremely brief Discovery
`
`Conference, that the undersigned considers so brief and unavailing as not believed to be
`
`within the spirit or meaning of the rules. In the Discovery Conference when discussing
`
`the cancellation grounds that the “CBD MD mark is incapable of distinguishing the goods
`
`of [Registrant] from the goods of others and therefore cannot function as a trademark and
`
`an indicator of source” because “phrase CBD MD is a commonly used descriptive phrase
`
`that connotes information on products which include CBD as an ingredient,” the Plaintiff’s
`
`counsel would provide the undersigned no details or hint of supporting material.
`
`
`
`The Order of January 8, 2021 (Paper 30) set a deadline for the Parties’ Initial
`
`Disclosures to be due on January 11, 2021. On Monday January 11, 2021 the Registrant
`
`sent their initial disclosure to the Petitioner. On this court set deadline, the Plaintiff again
`
`evidenced their bad faith filing of this case and their complete disinterest in prosecuting
`
`the merits of this action when they made no disclosures to the Registrant and did not
`
`contact the undersigned on or prior to this deadline regarding this submission.
`
`
`
` On Wednesday January 22, 2021 The Registrant served the Registrant’s First
`
`Request upon Petitioner’s counsel, which included requesting the identification and
`
`submission (Or making the materials available for inspection) of the materials that could
`
`form the Plaintiff’s initial disclosures. The Plaintiff was required to file a response to
`
`these discovery requests ON OR BEFORE February 22, 2021. The Plaintiff again
`
`4 | P a g e Cancellation Proceeding No. 92071109
`
`Motion
`
`
`
`
`

`

`evidenced their bad faith filing of this case and their complete disinterest in prosecuting
`
`the merits of this action when they made no disclosures to the Registrant and did not
`
`contact the undersigned on or prior to this deadline regarding this submission.
`
`The Registrant timely filed, on January 25, 2021, a motion to compel the omitted
`
`Initial Disclosures within 30 days of the Petitioner’s failure to file their Initial Disclosures
`
`(due on January 11, 2021) (Paper 31). In the Board’s order of February 1, 2021, the Board
`
`reiterated that the “deadline for service of initial disclosures was January 11, 2021” adding
`
`that the Petitioner must submit such disclosures “by February 8, 2021 in an absence of
`
`consent for an extension or suspension from Respondent. The Board hesitates to remind
`
`Petitioner that it brought this cancellation proceeding in the first instance and that it was
`
`filed on April 16, 2019, over 21 months ago. Petitioner carries the burden of moving
`
`forward in a timely manner on the proceeding schedule.” (Emphasis added).
`
`The Petitioner submitted what purports to be the Petitioners Initial Disclosure on
`
`Friday February 5, 2021, a copy of which is attached hereto. Allegedly complying with
`
`the requirement that the party provide “a description by category and location” “of all
`
`documents, electronically stored information, and tangible things that the disclosing party
`
`has in its possession, custody, or control and may use to support its claims or defenses,”
`
`the Petitioner noted that the following category of “documents are located at the office of
`
`Petitioner or its counsel in this proceeding”: “(1) Petitioner’s business operations, (2)
`
`Petitioner’s use of cbdMD as a mark, (2) Registrants’ business and use of CBD MD as a
`
`mark, and (4) regulatory actions and position taken by federal and state offices or
`
`agencies.”
`
`5 | P a g e Cancellation Proceeding No. 92071109
`
`Motion
`
`
`
`
`

`

`As set forth in TBMP 401.02 “the Board encourages parties to actually exchange
`
`copies of disclosed documents rather than to merely identify their location.” Contrary to
`
`this suggestion, the Petitioner here further evidenced their bad faith prosecution of this
`
`case with their clear intention of not supplying any of the alleged documents listed in the
`
`purported Petitioner’s Initial Disclosures. The Petitioner disingenuously suggests in the
`
`Initial Disclosure that “Petitioner will produce such information as required subject to an
`
`appropriate protective order entered by the Board.” The Petitioner is likely aware a
`
`protective order has already been entered in this case. Further there was no effort made
`
`by the Petitioner to propose a protective order or a modification of the existing one.
`
`In response to the Petitioner’s Initial Disclosures the undersigned sent email
`
`correspondence to the Petitioner’s counsel on Saturday February 6, 2021 that said, in its
`
`entirety:
`
` Thank you for the Initial Disclosures.
` It would seem that a mutually agreeable and signed Protective
`Order Or Modification to Protective Order may be required or desired
`shortly – would you like to propose one?
` When and where can we review the documents identified in
`your initial disclosure? Can we set up some timing for this review – I
`believe this is imperative to move forward with quickly.
` I believe our Depositions would likely begin with Martin
`Sumichrast, Scott Coffman and Dr. Sibyl Swift, after responses to
`outstanding discovery, of course. Please advise of desired format in this
`COVID world, and I am sure we can accommodate reasonable requests,
`and advise of general timing and availability.
` I believe that we should discuss general timing in this case.
`Outside of this case I would strongly urge your client to contact my client
`directly before this proceeding moves on and potentially damages the
`trademark rights of your client (possibly my client’s rights as well but I feel
`your client is less concerned about that).”
`
`In response to the inquiry of February 6, 2021, the Petitioner did not propose a
`
`signed protective order, or modifications to the existing protective order, nor allow for a
`
`6 | P a g e Cancellation Proceeding No. 92071109
`
`Motion
`
`
`
`
`

`

`review of the purported documents, nor discuss the format of depositions, nor discuss the
`
`timing of this case. It is clear the Petitioner had no intentions of complying with basic
`
`discovery rules in this tribunal and had no intentions of prosecuting this matter in any
`
`substantive manner. This entire action was entered in bad faith and the Petitioner has
`
`consistently ignored the rules of this tribunal throughout this proceeding.
`
`The Plaintiff again evidenced their bad faith filing of this case and their complete
`
`disinterest in prosecuting the merits of this action in this tribunal that they selected when
`
`on February 12, 2021, the petitioner commenced a civil action (3:21-cv-69) in the U.S.
`
`District Court of the Western District of North Carolina that included a request for
`
`cancellation of the subject mark, together with other claims.
`
`Also on February 12, 2021 the Petitioner filed with this tribunal Petitioner’s Motion
`
`to Stay Proceeding Pending Outcome of Civil Action (paper No. 33) as a way to whitewash
`
`and dismiss their bad faith filing of this action and their complete failure to comply with
`
`the rules of this tribunal or prosecute the merits of this action. It is relevant here to note
`
`that a stay or suspension of a Board proceeding pending the final determination of another
`
`proceeding is solely within the discretion of the Board; the court in which a civil action is
`
`pending has no power to suspend proceedings in a case before the Board, nor do parties
`
`or their attorneys. [See Opticians Association of America v. Independent Opticians of
`
`America Inc., 734 F. Supp. 1171, 14 USPQ2d 2021 (D.N.J. 1990) (district court has no
`
`control over Board docket and no power to stay Board proceedings), rev’d on other
`
`grounds, 920 F.2d 187, 17 USPQ2d 1117 (3d Cir. 1990); Martin Beverage Co. v. Colita
`
`Beverage Corp., 169 USPQ 568, 570 (TTAB 1971).]
`
`7 | P a g e Cancellation Proceeding No. 92071109
`
`Motion
`
`
`
`
`

`

` ARGUMENTS
`
`In regards to the motion to suspend (Petitioner’s Motion to Stay Proceeding
`
`Pending Outcome of Civil Action), the Registrant agrees that the civil action 3:21-cv-69
`
`will involve other matters outside Board jurisdiction and will consider broader issues
`
`beyond merely the right to registration. Judicial economy, however, is best served by first
`
`an evaluation of the concurrently filed Motion for Summary Judgement based upon the
`
`evidence in this case prior to consideration of the Petitioner’s motion to stay or suspend.
`
`The Motion for Summary Judgement can, if granted in its entirety, make both
`
`the Petitioner’s motion for suspension and the present motion to compel moot, as this
`
`Petition would be dismissed. Such a dismissal would assist the advancement of civil
`
`action 3:21-cv-69 as it would resolve some of the main issues in that case and not require
`
`a two year and significant monetary delay to reach a point on these issues that the current
`
`proceeding already has reached. Further even only a partial granting of the Motion for
`
`Summary Judgement can simplify the issues remaining in this case (if and when
`
`resumed) as well as the associated civil action 3:21-cv-69. Judicial economy is even
`
`served in the, hopefully unlikely, event that the Board was to consider and deny the
`
`Motion for Summary Judgement as the Board’s guidance in such rulings would be
`
`useful for both the Parties in this litigation and the court in civil action 3:21-cv-69.
`
`Registrant therefore requests that the Board consider the concurrently filed Motion
`
`for Summary Judgement prior to acting upon the timely and concurrently filed Motion
`
`to Compel Discovery.
`
`8 | P a g e Cancellation Proceeding No. 92071109
`
`Motion
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Consideration of and granting of the Motion to Compel Discovery, if it is not
`
`rendered moot with a granting of the Motion for Summary Judgement, greatly advances
`
`judicial economy in both this proceeding and the associated civil action 3:21-cv-69.
`
`Obviously the past due discovery is needed for this proceedings, should they resume,
`
`and clearly also for the same issues in the associated civil action 3:21-cv-69. Further, not
`
`granting this the Motion to Compel Discovery BEFORE suspension of these
`
`proceedings is effectively and inappropriately allowing the Petitioner and his counsel to
`
`suspend the case on their own volition and allowing them to selectively determine what
`
`rules of evidence and civil procedure with which they choose to comply.
`
`
`
`Thus, if the Board denies the Motion for Summary Judgement in whole or in part
`
`such that this proceeding continues, or if the Board regrettably elects not to decide the
`
`Summary Judgement Motion, then the concurrently filed Motion to Compel Discovery
`
`is not moot and it is respectfully requested that the Board consider and rule on this Motion
`
`to Compel Discovery before acting upon or granting the petitioner’s motion to suspend
`
`or stay this proceeding.
`
` The Registrant generally agrees that i) if the concurrent filed Motion for
`
`Summary Judgement is denied in whole or in part, is not now decided by the Board (the
`
`Registrant again asserts it should be decided NOW and granted in its entirety resulting in
`
`dismissal of this petition) and ii) if the Petitioner is made to fully comply with the discovery
`
`obligations to date, then, and only then, should this proceeding be stayed pending the
`
`outcome of the recently filed civil litigation.
`
`9 | P a g e Cancellation Proceeding No. 92071109
`
`Motion
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted:
`
`___/Blynn L. Shideler/__
`
`Blynn L. Shideler
`Attorney for the Applicants
`Registration No. 35,034
`3500 Brooktree Road Suite 200
`Wexford Pa 15090
`Blynn@BLKLawGroup.com
`Telephone: (724) 934-5450
`Facsimile: (724) 934-5461
`
`10 | P a g e Cancellation Proceeding No. 92071109
`
`Motion
`
`
`
`
`

`

`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CBDMD,LLC
`
`Plaintiff/Petitioner
`
`-v-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Cancellation Proceeding # 92071109
`
`Registration # 5173264
`
`Majik Medecine, LLC,
`
`Registrant.
`
`
`
`Certificate of Service
`
`I, Blynn L. Shideler, hereby certify that on the 4th day of March, 2021, a true and correct copy of
`
`the foregoing Registrant’s Opposition to Petitioner’s Motion to Stay Proceeding Pending
`
`Outcome of Civil Action was served upon Counsel for the Plaintiff/Petitioner, by E-mail
`
`addressed as follows:
`
`Richard Oparil
`Arnall Golden Gregory LLP
`1775 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW, SUITE 1000
`WASHINGTON, DC 20006
`UNITED STATES
`Richard.Oparil@AGG.com, Kevin.Bell@AGG.com
`Caroline.Maxwell@agg.com
`Phone: 202-677-4030
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted:
`
`Respectfully Submitted:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`___/Blynn L. Shideler/__
`
`Blynn L. Shideler
`Attorney for the Applicants
`
`11 | P a g e Cancellation Proceeding No. 92071109
`
`Motion
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Registration No. 35,034
`3500 Brooktree Road Suite 200
`Wexford Pa 15090
`Blynn@BLKLawGroup.com
`Telephone: (724) 934-5450
`Facsimile: (724) 934-5461
`
`12 | P a g e Cancellation Proceeding No. 92071109
`
`Motion
`
`
`
`
`

`

`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`CBDMD, LLC
`
`Plaintiff/Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Cancellation Proceeding # 92071109
`
`Registration # 5173264
`
`-v-
`
`Majik Medecine, LLC,
`
`Defendant/ Registrant
`
`
`
`Registrant’s first request for Admissions, set of Interrogatories and Request for
`production of documents directed to Petitioner CBDMD, LLC
`
`Registrant/Defendant, Majik Medecine, LLC serves the following Registrant’s
`
`First Request for Admissions, Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production of
`
`Documents Directed to Petitioner, CBDMD, LLC on CBD Industries LLC (formerly
`
`known as CBDMD, LLC).
`
`INSTRUCTIONS
`
`The responses to the request for admissions, answers to these Interrogatories
`
`and responses to the requests for production shall be served within thirty (30) days of
`
`the service thereof unless a different time period is provided by Court order, in which
`
`case the time period set by said Court order shall govern.
`
`These interrogatories shall be deemed continuing in nature so as to require the
`
`prompt filing of supplemental answers if CBD Industries LLC (formerly known as
`
`CBDMD, LLC) obtains further relevant information between the time that the answers
`
`are served and the time of the trial.
`
`

`

`Each interrogatory and sub-part of each interrogatory is to be answered
`
`separately and as completely as possible.
`
`Each interrogatory is addressed to the personal knowledge and information of the
`
`principles and controlling parties of CBD Industries LLC (formerly known as CBDMD,
`
`LLC), and to the knowledge and information of Petitioner’s attorneys, accountants,
`
`agents, employees, consultants, parent or related business entities and other
`
`representatives. The principles and controlling parties of CBD, LLC include the
`
`Managing Member of CBD Industries LLC (formerly known as CBDMD, LLC), cbdMD,
`
`Inc.
`
`If an interrogatory asks for information which could have, at some time,
`
`been answered by consulting documents which no longer exist, then in answer to
`
`such interrogatory petitioner shall:
`
`(a) identify what information was contained in such documents;
`
`(b) identify all of the type(s) of documents which contained such information;
`
`(c) state the time period during which such documents were maintained;
`
`(d) state the circumstances under which such documents ceased to exist;
`
`(e) state the date on which such documents ceased to exist;
`
`(f) identify all persons having knowledge of the circumstances under
`
`which such documents ceased to exist; and
`
`(g) identify all persons who have knowledge or had knowledge of the
`
`documents and the contents thereof.
`
`

`

`Whenever an interrogatory calls for the identity of a document or non-written
`
`communication claimed by Petitioner to be privileged, include in the statement of the
`
`identity of such document or non-written communication, the fact and nature of such
`
`claim of privilege and the basis for the assertion of such claim.
`
`No answer is to be left blank. If the answer to an interrogatory or subparagraph of
`
`an interrogatory is "none" or "unknown", such statement must be written in the
`
`answer. If the question is inapplicable, "N/A" must be written in the answer.
`
`With respect to the requests for admission, Petitioner must admit or deny each
`
`request, and, where necessary, specify the parts of each request to which Petitioner
`
`objects or cannot in good faith admit or deny. If Petitioner objects to only part of a
`
`request, Petitioner must admit or deny the remainder of the request. In the event that
`
`Petitioner objects to, or denies, any request or portion of a request, Petitioner must state
`
`the reasons for its objection or denial. These requests for admissions shall be deemed
`
`continuing and supplemental responses to the request for admission shall be required if
`
`Petitioner directly or indirectly obtains further information after Petitioner’s initial
`
`response. Each request solicits all information reasonably obtainable by Petitioner and
`
`Petitioner’s attorneys,
`
`investigators, agents, employees and representatives.
`
`If
`
`Petitioner answers a request on the basis that Petitioner lacks sufficient information to
`
`respond, describe any and all efforts made to be informed of the facts and
`
`circumstances necessary to answer or respond.
`
`With respect to the responses to the requests for production of documents,
`
`Petitioner must identify each document associated with each request. If Petitioner
`
`objects to only part of a request, Petitioner must produce the document associated with
`
`

`

`the remainder of the request. In the event that Petitioner objects to any request or
`
`portion of a request, Petitioner must state the reasons for its objection. These requests
`
`for production shall be deemed continuing and supplemental responses to the request
`
`for production shall be required if Petitioner directly or indirectly obtains further
`
`documents relevant to a request after Petitioner’s initial response. Each request solicits
`
`all documents reasonably obtainable by Petitioner and Petitioner’s attorneys,
`
`investigators, agents, employees and representatives. If Petitioner answers a request
`
`on the basis that Petitioner lacks sufficient information to respond, describe any and all
`
`efforts made to be informed of the facts and circumstances necessary to answer or
`
`respond.
`
`
`
`DEFINITIONS
`
`The words "you" and "your" refers to Petioner and the principles of Petitioner
`
`and includes those individuals and/or entities acting on Petitioner’s behalf, including
`
`but not limited to cbdMD, Inc., attorneys, accountants, agents, consultants,
`
`employees, parent or related business entities and other representatives of these
`
`parties.
`
`The words "document" and "documents" include all things within the meaning
`
`of the term as used in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and includes without
`
`limitation, any written, recorded or graphic matter, however produced or reproduced,
`
`including but not limited to correspondence, charts, contracts, agreements, notes,
`
`computer printouts, emails, memoranda, analyses, appraisals, projections, work
`
`papers, orders, summaries, invoices, bills, checks, bank statements, broker
`
`

`

`statements, buy-sell slips, diaries, calendars, photographs, tax returns, financial
`
`statements, management reports, audit reports, special purpose reports, deeds,
`
`mortgages, settlement sheets, corporate minutes and by-laws, loan applications,
`
`financial records and all other such tangible or retrievable documents of any kind,
`
`including any such documents in electronic form. When any of the foregoing
`
`documents are referred to, the reference shall include the original and each copy,
`
`draft and amendment thereof having any writing, notation, correction or markings
`
`unique to such copy, draft, or amendment.
`
`The words "identity" or "identify" as used in reference to an individual means
`
`to set forth his or her full name, his or her present, or last known, business or home
`
`address, and his or her job title.
`
`The words "identity" or "identify" as used in connection with a "document" or
`
`"documents" means to state the following for each copy of the document which
`
`contains different notations:
`
`(a) its date;
`
`(b) the identity of its author(s);
`
`(c) the identity of the individual(s) to whom it was addressed;
`
`(d) the format of the document(s);
`
`(e) the title;
`
`(f) the number of pages;
`
`(g) the identity of the individual(s) known or believed to have custody of
`
`

`

`each copy of the document having notations unique to such copies; and
`
`(h) a detailed description of the substance of the document.
`
`If
`
`the burden of deriving or ascertaining
`
`the answers would be
`
`substantially the same for the answering party as for the serving party, the answering
`
`party may give the serving party an opportunity to review and make copies of the
`
`relevant documents.
`
`The phrase "relating to" shall be interpreted generally, including, but, not
`
`limited to, "directly" or "indirectly referring to", "bearing on", "concerning" or
`
`"regarding".
`
`
`
`REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION (NOS. 1-101)
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 1
`
`Admit or deny that Petioner was formerly known as CBDMD LLC and is now
`
`known as CBD Industries LLC.
`
`Admitted:________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 2
`
`Admit or deny that Petioner was formed November 26, 2018.
`
`Admitted:_________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 3
`
`Admit or deny that cbdMD, Inc. is the Managing Member of Petioner.
`
`Admitted:________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`

`

`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 4
`
`Admit or deny that cbdMD, Inc. is the sole member of Petioner.
`
`Admitted:________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 5
`
`Admit or deny that Petioner is a wholly owned subsidiary of cbdMD, Inc.
`
`Admitted:________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 6
`
`Admit or deny that cbdMD, Inc. was formed March 17, 2015 and was formerly
`
`known as Level Brands, Inc. and Level Beauty Group, Inc.
`
`Admitted:________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 7
`
`Admit or deny that Petioner merged with Cure Based Development, LLC on or
`
`around December 20, 2018.
`
`Admitted:________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 8
`
`Admit or deny that Cure Based Development, LLC was a Las Vegas entity
`
`formed on August 3, 2017.
`
`Admitted:________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`

`

`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 9
`
`Admit or deny that AcqCO, LLC merged with Cure Based Development, LLC on
`
`or around December 20, 2018.
`
`Admitted:________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 10
`
`Admit or deny that AcqCO, LLC was a North Carolina entity formed on November
`
`8, 2018.
`
`Admitted:________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 11
`
`Admit or deny that the company then known as Level Brands, Inc. changed its
`
`name to cbdMD, Inc. on or around May 1, 2019.
`
`Admitted:________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 12
`
`Admit or deny that Cure Based Development, LLC filed a trademark application
`
`for federal registration for the mark CBDMD SYNERGY on December 20, 2018 now
`
`bearing trademark application serial number 87/613,823.
`
`.
`
`Admitted:________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`

`

`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 13
`
`Admit or deny that trademark application serial number 87/613,823 currently lists
`
`a goods description in International Class IC 005 of “Nutritional supplements in topical,
`
`balm or lotion form sold as a component of nutritional skin and animal coat care
`
`products; Dietary and nutritional supplements in the form of tinctures, drops, capsules,
`
`oils, gummies, and powders; Topical analgesic creams, gels, salves, sprays, powders,
`
`and ointments; Topical anti-inflammatory creams, gels, salves, sprays, powders, and
`
`ointments; Topical moisturizing creams, gels, salves, sprays, powders, and ointments;
`
`all of the foregoing containing CBD and all of the foregoing containing or derived from
`
`cannabis with a delta-9 THC concentration of not more than 0.3% on a dry weight basis”
`
`and International Class 34 of “Electronic cigarettes; electronic cigarette liquid containing
`
`CBD, namely, electronic cigarette liquid comprised of vegetable glycerin; electronic
`
`cigarette liquid comprised of CBD and flavorings in liquid form, other than essential oils,
`
`used to refill electronic cigarette cartridges; all of the foregoing containing or derived
`
`from, or intended for use with, cannabis with a delta-9 THC concentration of not more
`
`than 0.3% on a dry weight basis”
`
`Admitted:________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 14
`
`Admit or deny that Cure Based Development, LLC filed a trademark application
`
`for federal registration for the mark SYNERGY CBDMD on December 20, 2018 now
`
`bearing trademark application serial number 87/613,850.
`
`

`

`Admitted:________________
`
`
`
`Denied:_________________
`
`
`
`REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 15
`
`Admit or deny that trademark application serial number 87/613,850 currently lists
`
`a goods description in International Class IC 005 of “Nutritional supplements in topical,
`
`balm or lotion form sold as a component of nutritional skin and animal coat care
`
`products; Dietary and nutritional supplements in the form of tinctures, drops, capsules,
`
`oils, gummies, and powders; Topical analgesic creams, gels, salves, sprays, powders,
`
`and ointments; Topical anti-inflammatory creams, gels, salves, sprays, powders, and
`
`ointments; Topical moisturizing creams, gels, salves, sprays, powders, and ointments;
`
`all of the foregoing containing CBD and all of the foregoing containing or derived from
`
`cannabis with a delta-9 THC concentration of not more than 0.3% on a