Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov ESTTA Tracking number: ESTTA1042041 Filing date: 03/13/2020
IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Proceeding 92068175 Party Defendant Land's End Direct Merchants, Inc. Correspondence NATHAN T HARRIS Address LANDO & ANASTASI LLP 60 STATE STREET, 23RD FLOOR BOSTON, MA 02109 UNITED STATES [email protected], [email protected], emailser- [email protected] 617-395-7013
Submission Defendant's Notice of Reliance Filer's Name Nathan T. Harris Filer's email [email protected] Signature /Nathan T. Harris/ Date 03/13/2020 Attachments L2089-5001 - Lands Ends First Notice of Reliance.pdf(4508248 bytes ) IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Retrobrands USA LLC,
Petitioner, Cancellation No. 92068175 v. Registration Nos. 1,394,814 Lands’ End Direct Merchants, Inc., 1,492,716
Registrant.
LANDS’ END’S FIRST NOTICE OF RELIANCE
Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 2.122, Registrant Lands’ End Direct Merchants, Inc. (“Lands’
End”) makes of record and will rely upon the following documents, copies of which are attached hereto.
1a. Lands’ End’s First Set of Requests for Admission (with Exhibits 1-7).
1b. Petitioner Retrobrands USA LLC’s (“Retrobrands”) Amended Responses Nos. 1-
16, and 24-27 to Lands’ End’s First Set of Requests for Admission. These responses are relevant to Retrobrands’ standing in this proceeding, and in particular its lack of a bona fide intent to use its purported WILLIS & GEIGER mark in interstate commerce.
2. Petitioner’s Answers No. 1-5 and 9 to Registrant’s First Set of Interrogatories.
These responses are relevant to Retrobrands’ standing in this proceeding, and in particular its lack of a bona fide intent to use its purported WILLIS & GEIGER mark in interstate commerce
(Nos. 1-5) and to Lands’ End’s non-abandonment of its WILLIS & GEIGER mark (No. 9).
3. Printouts from the USPTO’s Trademark Status & Document Retrieval (TSDR) database showing the details and status of 25 trademark applications filed on an intent-to-use basis by Retrobrands. These applications are relevant to Retrobrands’ standing in this proceeding, and in particular its lack of a bona fide intent to use its purported WILLIS &
GEIGER mark in interstate commerce.
4. Printout from the USPTO’s TSDR database of U.S. Trademark Application No.
78/100,421, which eventually issued as U.S. Trademark Registration No. 2,761,675 (the “’675
Registration”). This application is relevant to Retrobrands’ standing in this proceeding, and in
particular its lack of a bona fide intent to use its purported WILLIS & GEIGER mark in
interstate commerce.
5. A true and correct copy of the Board’s decision in Warner Bros. Ent. Inc. v. The
Kaplan Trust, Cancellation No. 92043813, 2007 WL 8304081 at *4-5 (TTAB Nov. 26, 2007), cancelling the ’675 Registration on the ground of fraud. This decision is relevant to Retrobrands’ standing in this proceeding, and in particular its lack of a bona fide intent to use its purported
WILLIS & GEIGER mark in interstate commerce.
6. A Consent Decree entered by the court in in Lands’ End, Inc. et al. v. Connecticut
Shotgun Manufacturing Co., Civ. No. 3:09-cv-00278-BBC (W.D. Wisc.) (the “2009 Litigation”), accessed at https://www.pacer.gov. The Consent Decree is relevant to Lands’ End’s non-
abandonment of its WILLIS & GEIGER mark.
7. Lands’ End’s Responses Nos. 7-9 and 12-18 to Petitioner’s First Set of Requests
for Admissions to Registrant. These responses are relevant to Lands’ End’s non-abandonment of
its WILLIS & GEIGER mark, and should in fairness be considered pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §
2.120(k)(5) so as to make not misleading the evidence offered by the inquiring party
(Retrobrands), namely, Lands’ End’s Response No. 20 to Petitioner’s First Set of Requests for
Admissions to Registrant and Lands’ End’s Response No. 10 to Petitioner’s First Set of Written
Interrogatories to Registrant. See Petitioner’s Notice of Reliance on Registrant’s Discovery
Responses at Paras. (a), (b).
- 2 - Dated: March 13, 2020 Respectfully submitted,
Nathan T. Harris John N. Anastasi Ann Lamport Hammitte LANDO & ANASTASI, LLP 60 State Street, 23rd Floor Boston, MA 02109 Tel: (617) 395-7013 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Registrant
- 3 - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that the foregoing document was served upon Petitioner Retrobrands USA
LLC on March 13, 2020, by emailing a copy thereof to the following correspondence address of record for Petitioner:
/Nathan T. Harris/ Nathan T. Harris
- 4 -
Exhibit 1a
IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Retrobrands USA LLC,
Petitioner, Cancellation No. 92068175 v. Registrations No. 1,394,814 Lands’ End Direct Merchants, Inc., 1,492,716
Registrant.
LANDS’ END’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION
Pursuant to Rule 32 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 37 C.F.R. §2.120(d),
Lands’ End Direct Merchants, Inc. (“Lands’ End”) propounds the following Requests for
Admission (“Requests”) to Retrobrands USA LLC (“Retrobrands”), to be answered fully and separately, in writing, within thirty (30) days after service of these requests, with all documents and things to be produced at the offices of Lando & Anastasi, LLP, Riverfront Office Park, One
Main Street, Eleventh Floor, Cambridge, MA 02142, or at such other place as agreed by counsel.
Definitions
The Requests are subject to the definitions set forth below:
A. The term “WILLIS & GEIGER Registrations” collectively refers to U.S. Trademark
Registrations No. 1,394,814 and 1,492,716.
B. The term “WILLIS & GEIGER Registered Marks” collectively refers to Lands’ End’s
WILLIS & GEIGER (and design) marks identified in the WILLIS & GEIGER
Registrations.
C. The term “Retrobrands Application” refers to U.S. Trademark Appl. No.
87/574,744.
D. The term “Retrobrands WILLIS & GEIGER Mark” refers to Retrobrand’s
asserted WILLIS & GEIGER trademark that is the subject of the Retrobrands
Application.
E. The term “document” is synonymous in meaning and equal in scope to its usage
in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(a). A draft or non-identical copy is a
separate document within the meaning of this term. Any document bearing any
marks, including, without limitation, initials, stamped information, comments or
notations not a part of the original text is also a separate document within the
meaning of this term.
F. The term “person” means any natural person or any business, legal, or
governmental entity or association.
G. When referring to a person, to “identify” means to give the person’s full name,
present or last known address, and, when referring to a natural person, the present
or last known place of employment.
H. When referring to documents, to “identify” means to give, to the extent known,
the (i) type of document; (ii) general subject matter; (iii) date of the document;
and (iv) author(s), addressee(s), and recipient(s).
I. The term “Lands’ End” as well as the party’s full or abbreviated name or a
pronoun referring to a party, means Lands’ End Direct Merchants, Inc. and, where
applicable, the company’s officers, directors, employees, agents, affiliates, and
predecessors in interest.
J. The terms “you,” “your,” and “Retrobrands” as well as the party’s full or
abbreviated name or a pronoun referring to a party, means Retrobrands USA
- 2 - LLC, and, where applicable, the company’s officers, directors, employees, agents,
affiliates, and predecessors in interest.
K. The term “concerning” means referring to, describing, evidencing, or constituting.
L. The singular shall include the plural and vice versa; the terms “and” and “or” are
both conjunctive and disjunctive.
Instructions
1. Where a claim of privilege is asserted in objecting to any disclosure, and any information is withheld on the basis of such assertion, specify in log form the nature of the document or disclosure, identify by name, address, title and business affiliation the writer, the addressee, and all recipients thereof, and set forth the general subject matter to which the information relates, and its date.
2. A reason should be stated for any objection. The response to each Request should either specifically admit or deny the matter, or set forth in detail the reason(s) why the matter be be truthfully admitted or denied. A denial should fairly meet the substance of the Request, and when good faith requires, an answer should specify as much of the matter as true and qualify or deny the remainder.
3. A lack of information or knowledge cannot be given as a reason for failure to admit or deny unless the response indicates that reasonable inquiry has been made and that information known or readily obtainable is insufficient to enable admission or denial of the matter.
4. To the extent that any Request is objected to as vague or ambiguous, please identify the particular words, terms, or phrases that are asserted to make such Request vague or
- 3 - ambiguous, specify the meaning actually attributed by you to such words, terms, or phrases for purposes of your response, and respond to the Request accordingly.
5. These Interrogatories are continuing and may require supplemental response and production. If any information responsive to any Request is not presently known, identifiable or available, include a statement to that effect and furnish the information when known, identifiable, or available.
- 4 - DOCUMENT REQUESTS
Request No. 1
Admit that Retrobrands has no documents in its possession, custody, or control evidencing its intent to use the Retrobrands WILLIS & GEIGER Mark on or before August 18, 2017.
Request No. 2 Admit that as of August 18, 2017, Retrobrands had prepared no business or marketing plans or style guides concerning its intended use of the Retrobrands WILLIS & GEIGER Mark.
Request No. 3 Admit that the document attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a “style guide” created by Retrobrands for the Retrobrands WILLIS & GEIGER Mark.
Request No. 4 Admit that the earliest draft of the style guide attached hereto as Exhibit 1 was created after August 18, 2017.
Request No. 5 Admit that the style guide attached hereto as Exhibit 1 does not include any definite or concrete plans or actions previously taken or intended to be taken by Retrobrands to obtain, manufacture, market, or sell any products under the Retrobrands WILLIS & GEIGER Mark.
Request No. 6 Admit that the style guide attached hereto as Exhibit 1 does not include any definite or concrete plans or actions previously taken or intended to be taken by Retrobrands to license the Retrobrands WILLIS & GEIGER Mark.
Request No. 7 Admit that Retrobrands had no communications on or before August 18, 2017 with any potential manufacturer of goods to be sold under the WILLIS & GEIGER Mark.
Request No. 8 Admit that Retrobrands had no communications on or before August 18, 2017 with any potential licensee concerning the Retrobrands WILLIS & GEIGER Mark.
Request No. 9 Admit that Retrobrands had no communications on or before August 18, 2017 with Lisa Marks Associates, Inc. or any other actual or potential licensing agents concerning the Retrobrands WILLIS & GEIGER Mark.
- 5 -
Request No. 10 Admit that the document attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of a February 28, 2019 email from Mickey Marks of Lisa Marks Associates, Inc. (“LMA”) to counsel for Lands’ End, copying Jeffrey Kaplan of Retrobrands.
Request No. 11 Admit that Mr. Marks asserts, in the February 28, 2019 email, that a July 18, 2018 email exchange with Mr. Kaplan “has been LMA’s only discussion about this with Jeff/RetroBrands – as ownership of this brand has not been confirmed, LMA has taken no action whatsoever regarding Willis & Geiger other than to take a look at the attached Style Guide that Jeff shared with us and send Jeff the email above – that is all.”
Request No. 12 Admit that the statements made in Mr. Marks’ February 28, 2019 email attached hereto as Exhibit 2 are true and accurate, to the best of Retrobrands’ knowledge.
Request No. 13 Admit that Retrobrands had no communications prior to January 1, 2018 with Lisa Marks Associates, Inc. concerning the Retrobrands WILLIS & GEIGER Mark.
Request No. 14 Admit that Lisa Marks Asssociates, Inc. has never taken any action regarding the Retrobrands WILLIS & GEIGER Mark.
Request No. 15 Admit that Retrobrands is the owner of U.S. Trademark Registration. No. 4,414,932 (the “’932 Registration”) for a design mark incorporating the wording KEN-L RATION for “Hooded sweat shirts” in class 25 (the “KEN-L RATION Mark”).
Request No. 16 Admit that the image attached as Exhibit 3 hereto is a true and correct copy of a specimen of use submitted with the application for the ’932 Registration on April 12, 2013 by Applicant Jeffrey Kaplan.
Request No. 17 Admit that the apparel shown in the specimen of use for the ’932 Registration did not actually bear the KEN-L RATION Mark, but was digitally altered or manipulated to apply the mark to a photograph of apparel that did not bear the KEN-L RATION Mark.
Request No. 18 Admit that the photograph of the model and sweatshirt (without the KEN-L RATION Mark) used to create the specimen of use for the ’932 Registration is widely available on the Internet, as seen in the printouts attached hereto as Exhibit 4.
Request No. 19 Admit that Retrobrands and/or Mr. Kaplan created the specimen of use for the ’932 Registration using
- 6 - Request No. 20 Admit that, to the best of Retrobrands’ knowledge, the apparel shown in the specimen of use for the ’932 Registration did not physically exist as of April 12, 2013, the filing date of the application for the ’932 Registration.
Request No. 21 Admit that the apparel shown in the specimen of use for the ’932 Registration was not being offered for sale by Retrobrands and/or Mr. Kaplan as of April 12, 2013, the filing date of the application for the ’932 Registration.
Request No. 22 Admit that Retrobrands and/or Mr. Kaplan has never used the KEN-L RATION Mark of the ’932 Registration in commerce.
Request No. 23 Admit that the ’932 Registration is invalid on the grounds of non-use and/or fraud.
Request No. 24 Admit that the document attached hereto as Exhibit 5 is a true and correct copy of a page on Lisa Marks Associates, Inc.’s website, accessible at
Request No. 25 Admit that, to the best of Retrobrands’ knowledge, Lisa Marks Associates, Inc. is aware that the specimen of use for the ’932 Registration is not authentic and/or that the ’932 Registration is invalid on the grounds of non-use and/or fraud.
Request No. 26 Admit that Retrobrands is the owner of U.S. Trademark Registration. No. 4,138,855 (the “’855 Registration”) for a design mark incorporating the wording TENDER VITTLES for “T- Shirts” in class 25 (the “TENDER VITTLES Mark”).
Request No. 27 Admit that the image attached as Exhibit 6 hereto is a true and correct copy of a specimen of use submitted with the application for the ’855 Registration on September 13, 2011 by Applicant Jeffrey Kaplan, and again with a Section 8 & 15 Declaration on May 1, 2018.
Request No. 28 Admit that the apparel shown in the specimen of use for the ’855 Registration did not actually bear the TENDER VITTLES Mark, but was digitally altered or manipulated to apply the mark to a photograph of apparel that did not bear the TENDER VITTLES Mark.
Request No. 29 Admit that the photograph of the model and sweatshirt (without the TENDER VITTLES Mark) used to create the specimen of use for the ’855 Registration is widely available on the Internet, as seen in the printouts attached hereto as Exhibit 7.
- 7 -
Request No. 30 Admit that Retrobrands and/or Mr. Kaplan created the specimen of use for the ’855 Registration using an online tool for designing apparel.
Request No. 31 Admit that, to the best of Retrobrands’ knowledge, the apparel shown in the specimen of use for the ’855 Registration did not physically exist as of September 13, 2011, the filing date of the application for the ’855 Registration.
Request No. 32 Admit that the apparel shown in the specimen of use for the ’855 Registration was not being offered for sale by Retrobrands and/or Mr. Kaplan as of May 1, 2018, the filing date of the Section 8 & 15 Declaration for the ’855 Registration.
Request No. 33 Admit that Retrobrands and/or Mr. Kaplan has never used the TENDER VITTLES Mark of the ’855 Registration in commerce.
Request No. 34 Admit that the ’855 Registration is invalid on the grounds of non-use and/or fraud.
Request No. 35 Admit that, as seen in Exhibit 5 hereto, Lisa Marks Associates, Inc.’s website lists the Retrobrands TENDER VITTLES Mark as one of its “consumer brands.”
Request No. 36 Admit that, to the best of Retrobrands’ knowledge, Lisa Marks Associates, Inc. is aware that the specimen of use for the ’855 Registration is not authentic and/or that the ’855 Registration is invalid on the grounds of non-use and/or fraud.
Date: March 29, 2019 Nathan T. Harris John N. Anastasi Ann Lamport Hammitte LANDO & ANASTASI, LLP One Main Street – 11th Floor Cambridge, MA 02142 Tel: (617) 395-7013 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Registrant
- 8 -
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that the foregoing document was served upon Petitioner Retrobrands USA LLC on March 29, 2019, by emailing a copy thereof to the following correspondence address of record for Registrant:
/Nathan T. Harris/ Nathan T. Harris
- 9 - RFA Exhibit 1
RFA Exhibit 2 Nathan T. Harris
From: Mickey Marks
Hi Natha … This is Mi ke Marks a d I a the Ma agi g Dire tor a d Part er at LMA … O er the ears, our fir has a ted as Li e si g Age t for so e of the RetroBra ds USA trade arks – it is i porta t to ote that LMA does ot represe t a d has e er represe ted Willis & Geiger o ehalf of RetroBra ds as it is our u dersta di g that o ership of this trade ark has ot ee o fir ed … O / / , Jeff Kapla shared a St le Guide atta hed that he had put together for the Willis & Geiger ra d a d asked our opi io of it … He also e plai ed that this ra d as ot et i the RetroBra ds portfolio, ut that he as orki g o fi alizi g that.
I a a fa of this ra d a d as a good usto er i its he da he I as a ou g a orki g i the ad ertisi g usi ess a d respo ded to Jeff ith the follo i g e ail o / / after seei g the St le Guide Jeff had shared:
Hi Jeff – es, e spoke a out this … e LOVE this ra d – i fa t I ha e a ite s pur hased fro their atalogues dati g a k ultiple de ades ago … I used to e a ig usto er of their utto ‐do dress shirts hi h ere arti ulated i the el o s for greater o fort/ o e e t , I also still ha e a d use a great Willis & Geiger leather rief ase hi h I a take to a eeti gs e ha e … We ha e stro g relatio ships ith the ajor apparel o pa ies a d are happ to dis uss this opportu it ith the he RetroBra ds USA lears o ership of this trade ark … please keep us posted o ti i g!
Co grats, Mi ke
That has ee LMA’s o l dis ussio a out this ith Jeff/RetroBra ds – as o ership of this ra d has ot ee o fir ed, LMA has take o a tio hatsoe er regardi g Willis & Geiger other tha to take a look at the atta hed St le Guide that Jeff shared ith us a d se d Jeff the e ail a o e – that is all. O er the ourse of the o ths et ee / / a d o e o asio all asked Jeff at RetroBra ds USA a out the status of Willis & Geiger i RetroBra ds portfolio a d ha e u derstood that this o ti ues to e a ork i progress … We ha e o dis o era le i for atio a d appre iate our o fir atio that this has ee helpful a d full respo si e to our su poe a.
We are happ to s hedule a all ith ou if ou thi k that ould e helpful.
All the est, Mi ke
Mickey Marks Managing Director Lisa Marks Associates, Inc. (LMA) A Licensing and Marketing Agency
181 Westchester Avenue Suite 304-H Port Chester,NY10573
1 Ph: 914.933.3900 Fax: 914.933.3901
[email protected] www.lma-inc.com
Please c o nside r the e nvironme nt be fo re printing this e mail∙
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential information and is intended solely for use by the individual to whom it is addressed. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender, do not disclose its contents to others and delete it from your system
Fro : Natha T. Harris