• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
18 results

Karsten Manufacturing Corporation v. William Burbank

Docket 91274882, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (Mar. 7, 2022)
Case TypeOpposition
MarksPING
Applicant William Burbank
Opposer Karsten Manufacturing Corporation
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

No. 18 - Board Decision: Opposition Sustained

Document Karsten Manufacturing Corporation v. William Burbank, 91274882, No. 18 (T.T.A.B. Oct. 6, 2022)
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board P.O.
By the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board: On October 4, 2022, Applicant filed an abandonment of its application Serial No. 90627374 with prejudice.
Trademark Rule 2.135 provides that if, in an inter partes proceeding, the Applicant files an abandonment without the written consent of every adverse party to the proceeding, judgment shall be entered against Applicant.
In view thereof, and because Opposer's written consent to the abandonment is not of record, judgment is hereby entered against Applicant, the opposition is sustained and registration to Applicant is refused.1
1 In view of the foregoing, the Board’s September 27, 2022 notice of default and Applicant’s September 28, 2022 motion to vacate default are both considered moot.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 15 - Notice of Default

Document Karsten Manufacturing Corporation v. William Burbank, 91274882, No. 15 (T.T.A.B. Sep. 27, 2022)
Nicole Thier, Paralegal Specialist: An answer to the notice of opposition was due (as last reset) in this proceeding on September 14, 2022.
Inasmuch as it appears that no answer has been filed, nor has Applicant filed a motion to further extend the time to file an answer, notice of default is hereby entered against Applicant pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
Applicant is allowed until thirty days from the date of this order to show cause why judgment by default should not be entered against Applicant in accordance with Fed. R. Civ.
The failure to file a timely answer tolls all deadlines, including the discovery conference, until the issue of default is resolved.
The schedule for the discovery conference, initial disclosures, discovery and trial will be reset in the event that the Board resumes proceedings.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 14 - Extension of Time Granted

Document Karsten Manufacturing Corporation v. Burbank, William, 91274882, No. 14 (T.T.A.B. Aug. 15, 2022)
Generally, the Federal Rules of Evidence apply to Board trials.
The parties may stipulate to a wide variety of matters, and many requirements relevant to the trial phase of Board proceedings are set forth in Trademark Rules 2.121 through 2.125.
Oral argument at final hearing will be scheduled only upon the timely submission of a separate notice as allowed by Trademark Rule 2.129(a).
Note: Parties are strongly encouraged to check the entire document before filing.1 The Board will not extend or reset proceeding schedule dates or other deadlines to allow time to re-file documents.
1 To facilitate accuracy, ESTTA provides thumbnails to view each page before submitting.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 12 - Extension of Time Granted

Document Karsten Manufacturing Corporation v. Burbank, William, 91274882, No. 12 (T.T.A.B. Jul. 15, 2022)
Generally, the Federal Rules of Evidence apply to Board trials.
The parties may stipulate to a wide variety of matters, and many requirements relevant to the trial phase of Board proceedings are set forth in Trademark Rules 2.121 through 2.125.
Oral argument at final hearing will be scheduled only upon the timely submission of a separate notice as allowed by Trademark Rule 2.129(a).
Note: Parties are strongly encouraged to check the entire document before filing.1 The Board will not extend or reset proceeding schedule dates or other deadlines to allow time to re-file documents.
1 To facilitate accuracy, ESTTA provides thumbnails to view each page before submitting.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 8 - Extension of Time Granted

Document Karsten Manufacturing Corporation v. Burbank, William, 91274882, No. 8 (T.T.A.B. May. 12, 2022)
Generally, the Federal Rules of Evidence apply to Board trials.
The parties may stipulate to a wide variety of matters, and many requirements relevant to the trial phase of Board proceedings are set forth in Trademark Rules 2.121 through 2.125.
Oral argument at final hearing will be scheduled only upon the timely submission of a separate notice as allowed by Trademark Rule 2.129(a).
Note: Parties are strongly encouraged to check the entire document before filing.1 The Board will not extend or reset proceeding schedule dates or other deadlines to allow time to re-file documents.
1 To facilitate accuracy, ESTTA provides thumbnails to view each page before submitting.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 6 - Extension of Time Granted

Document Karsten Manufacturing Corporation v. Burbank, William, 91274882, No. 6 (T.T.A.B. Apr. 13, 2022)
Generally, the Federal Rules of Evidence apply to Board trials.
The parties may stipulate to a wide variety of matters, and many requirements relevant to the trial phase of Board proceedings are set forth in Trademark Rules 2.121 through 2.125.
Oral argument at final hearing will be scheduled only upon the timely submission of a separate notice as allowed by Trademark Rule 2.129(a).
Note: Parties are strongly encouraged to check the entire document before filing.1 The Board will not extend or reset proceeding schedule dates or other deadlines to allow time to re-file documents.
1 To facilitate accuracy, ESTTA provides thumbnails to view each page before submitting.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 2 - Notice and Trial Dates Sent; Answer Due:

Document Karsten Manufacturing Corporation v. Burbank, William, 91274882, No. 2 (T.T.A.B. Mar. 7, 2022)
An answer filed on paper under these limited circumstances must be accompanied by a Petition to the Director (and the required fee under Trademark Rule 2.6).
A request for Board participation must be made either through ESTTA, or by telephone call to the assigned interlocutory attorney named on the TTABVUE record for this proceeding.
During their conference, the parties are to discuss whether they wish to seek mediation or arbitration, and whether they can stipulate to the Board's Accelerated Case Resolution (ACR) process for a more efficient and cost-effective means of obtaining the Board’s determination of the proceeding.
Regarding the scope and limits of discovery, see TBMP 414; discoverable items may include documents, tangible things, and electronically stored information (ESI).
Regarding the procedures and deadlines for pretrial disclosures and trial, and specifically the noticing, taking, serving and submitting of evidence and testimony, see Trademark Rules 2.120(k), 2.121, 2.122, 2.123 and 2.125, as well as TBMP Chapter 700.
cite Cite Document
Analyze
1 2 >>