Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`ESTTA1030
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`06/11/2013
`
`Filing date:
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`76293326
`Prema Jyothi Light
`SHIMMERING BALLERINAS & DANCERS
`PREMA JYOTHI LIGHT
`12000 E 16TH AVE #301
`AURORA, CO 80010
`UNITED STATES
`gloriously@india.com, gloriously@in.com, premajyothilight@shimmeringly.com
`EXHIBIT F TO APPEAL BRIEF
`76293326 SHBD APPEAL BRIEF EXHIBIT F.pdf(40284 bytes )
`PREMA JYOTHI LIGHT
`premajyothilight@shimmeringly.com
`/ prema jyothi light /
`06/11/2013
`
`Proceeding
`Applicant
`Applied for Mark
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`Attachments
`Filer's Name
`Filer's e-mail
`Signature
`Date
`
`

`

`Trademark: SHIMMERING BALLERINAS & DANCERS, Serial #: 76293326, Applicant: Prema Jyothi Light
`
`
`EXHIBIT F (Page 1 of 4)
`
`Email letter to Cynthia Lynch, Director of Trademark Policies & Procedures,
`Re Petition Fee Issues, dated 02-13-2013
`
`
`Sent 02-13-13, 10:37 p.m.
`
`February 13, 2013
`
`TO:
`
`
`
`Cynthia Lynch
`Administrative Director
`Trademark Policies & Procedures
`
`Prema Jyothi Light
`
`
`FROM:
`
`DATE: February 13, 2013
`
`RE:
`
`Dear Ms. Lynch,
`
`
`
`Your Executive Problem-Solving Talents Are Needed!
`
` I
`
` am writing to ask that you use your talents at executive problem-solving to help resolve an
`unusual situation, which has not been properly handled by your subordinates.
`
`On January 28, 2013, I filed a single PETITION TO REVIVE with regard to two sister
`Trademarks, SHIMMERING RAINFOREST, Serial # 76293327, and SHIMMERING
`BALLERINAS & DANCERS, Serial # 76293326. (See attached pdf of PETITION TO REVIVE.)
`
`These Trademarks were deemed “abandoned” because the TEAS filings of the RESPONSES TO
`OFFICE ACTIONS were deemed late. The RESPONSES were due November 26, 2013, and
`although they were filed while it was still November 26, 2013 in the Denver, Colorado area, the
`final clicks of the filing online came in a few minutes past midnight, East Coast time on
`November 27th, due to unforeseen glitches in using the TEAS system.
`
`On November 28, 2012, I received a Notice of Abandonment from the USPTO, and two months to
`file a Petition to Revive.
`
`Like Cinderella, a few minutes past the stroke of midnight, whose horse-drawn carriage turned
`back into a pumpkin and field mice, I found that my Trademarks were deemed “abandoned”, even
`though the filing receipts contained both dates, 11-26-12 as the date signed, given automatically
`by the TEAS system (the filings were initiated in the evening) and 11-27-12 (the date that the
`final clicks came in a few minutes after midnight, East Coast Time.) And, no prince with a glass
`slipper to soften the distressing situation!
`
`
`
`Applicant’s Appeal Brief, June 3, 2013, EXHIBIT F
`Shimmering Ballerinas & Dancers, Serial # 76293326
`
`EX-011
`
`

`

`Trademark: SHIMMERING BALLERINAS & DANCERS, Serial #: 76293326, Applicant: Prema Jyothi Light
`
`EXHIBIT F (Page 2 of 4)
`
`Email letter to Cynthia Lynch, Director of Trademark Policies & Procedures,
`Re Petition Fee Issues, dated 02-13-2013
`
`
`
`However, I submitted a timely PETITION TO REVIVE on January 28, 2013.
`
`These two sister Trademarks were on remand to the Examining Attorney from the TTAB.
`Because the two Trademarks are so similar, and involve the same issues, the TTAB had ordered
`that the two Trademark cases be consolidated, to be handled in tandem, so that the paperwork
`for both could be synchronized. (Please see, attached as a pdf, the most recent TTAB Order dated
`08-08-11, showing that the TTAB places both serial numbers on the same single consolidated
`Orders, which contain provisions for both Trademarks in a single Order.)
`
`On February 1, 2013, I received notice that Revival had been granted, but just for one of the two
`Trademarks. (See Notice of Revival dated 02-01-13, attached as pdf.) However, my PETITION
`had been filed for both Trademarks. No mention was made of the second Trademark, and no
`Notice of Deficiency had been filed.
`
`So, on February 5, 2013, I filed a REQUEST FOR REINSTATEMENT (please see attached pdf),
`asking that the second Trademark also be revived, as it had been deemed “abandoned” for the
`same reasons, on the same date, and as both had been included in the same short three-page
`PETITION TO REVIVE, which had explained that the two cases had been consolidated by the
`TTAB for ease in handling.
`
` I
`
` wasn’t totally sure that this was the correct form to file, but it was the only one available online
`which didn’t require a fee for protesting a decision on filing a fee!
`
`On February 6, 2013, I received a Notice of Deficiency from your paralegal, Deborah Blocker (see
`attached), informing me that I had 30 days to file a second $100 fee for the one PETITION, even
`though I had already paid the $100 Petition Fee for filing the PETITION.
`
`She did not address any of the issues delineated in the original PETITION TO REVIVE,
`pertaining to the consolidation of the two cases by the TTAB, or any of the issues delineated in
`the REQUEST FOR REINSTATEMENT, explaining why the Notice of Revival should include
`both Trademarks.
`
`Therefore, I filed a PRELIMINARY RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY, dated 02-07-13
`(see attached pdf), to again explain this unusual situation. I asked for supervisory review.
`
`In this PRELIMINARY RESPONSE, I attached proof of payment in full for the $100 filing fee for
`the PETITION TO REVIVE, with citations to the TMEP and Code of Federal Regulations,
`including the sections cited by Ms. Blocker, showing that the Petition Fee is assessed per
`Petition, not per Trademark, and that there is nothing in either the TMEP or CFR prohibiting
`filing one Petition for two related and simultaneous Trademark cases.
`
`
`Applicant’s Appeal Brief, June 3, 2013, EXHIBIT F
`Shimmering Ballerinas & Dancers, Serial # 76293326
`
`EX-012
`
`

`

`Trademark: SHIMMERING BALLERINAS & DANCERS, Serial #: 76293326, Applicant: Prema Jyothi Light
`
`EXHIBIT F (Page 3 of 4)
`
`Email letter to Cynthia Lynch, Director of Trademark Policies & Procedures,
`Re Petition Fee Issues, dated 02-13-2013
`
`
`On February 7, 2013, I received an email from Ms. Blocker, in response to my PRELIMINARY
`RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY, requiring payment of the second $100 fee by the
`earlier stated deadline. (See attached pdf of her email response.)
`
`In her response, Ms. Blocker did not address ANY of my concerns, as to the consolidation of the
`two cases by the TTAB, set forth as the reason for petitioning for revival of both related cases in
`the same single PETITION. And, she did not cite any new provisions of the TMEP or CFR, to
`refute the simple fact that the Petition Fee is stated in the CFR as $100 per Petition, not per
`Trademark.
`
` I
`
` feel that this situation has not been properly handled by Ms. Blocker, and I am asking for your
`executive review of this situation.
`
`To simply ignore orders by the TTAB, just because they may be unusual, and to brush off
`decisions of the TTAB, which they made with good cause, is a huge insult to the TTAB, and these
`two Trademark cases will be falling back into their laps fairly soon. The TTAB is a respectable
`body of judges, whose authority is usually respected within the USPTO.
`
`Why have them thinking that your Trademark Policies & Procedures Department does not wish
`to respect their Orders?
`
`To brush off TTAB Orders is not a good Trademark Policy and Procedure!
`
`Could you kindly review the handling of this situation, glance through the attached pdfs of the
`paper trail for this situation, and have your staff issue a parallel NOTICE OF REVIVAL for
`SHIMMERING RAINFOREST?
`
`Otherwise, your Department is needlessly throwing the two cases out of sync with each other, in
`needless defiance of TTAB wishes for consolidation and synchronization of handling of these two
`cases, and tandem handling, of the two cases together.
`
`Your Department would also be charging $200 for one short PETITION, with no backup in the
`TMEP or CFR for doing this, which simply provide for a single $100 Petition Fee for any one
`Petition.
`
`The TTAB goes “by the book”, and there are no laws on the books which prohibit filing one
`Petition for two related Trademarks, or which provide for charging $200 for a single short
`Petition.
`
`
`
`Applicant’s Appeal Brief, June 3, 2013, EXHIBIT F
`Shimmering Ballerinas & Dancers, Serial # 76293326
`
`EX-013
`
`

`

`Trademark: SHIMMERING BALLERINAS & DANCERS, Serial #: 76293326, Applicant: Prema Jyothi Light
`
`EXHIBIT F (Page 4 of 4)
`
`Email letter to Cynthia Lynch, Director of Trademark Policies & Procedures,
`Re Petition Fee Issues, dated 02-13-2013
`
`
`
`
`
`This is why we like to have people making decisions, rather than just robots, or touch-tone phone
`menus, or latch-key websites!
`
`This pair of cases is a little unusual, and unusual handling, with a little TLC, is what is needed
`here, rather than just a rubber-stamp handling which ignores individual variations in cases.
`This is why we like to have people making decisions, rather than just robots, or touch-tone phone
`menus, or latch-key websites!
`
`Review is needed by someone intelligent and perceptive enough to see that there are unusual
`features of this situation. I think you are probably just the right person to see this, and with the
`authority to do the right thing!
`
`So I would be very grateful for your executive review. Your assistance would also be of assistance
`to the TTAB, which would appreciate your respect for their wishes and their Orders. This could
`prevent needless inter-departmental conflicts and acrimony.
`
`Thank you for your kind attention. Please feel free to email me if you need further information.
`
`God bless you and peace be with you!
`
`Most sincerely,
`
`Prema Jyothi Light
`premajyothilight@shimmeringly.com
`
`Attachments:
`
`01 PETITION TO REVIVE both Trademarks dated 01-28-13
`02 ACCOMPANYING RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION for both Trademarks dated 01-28-13
`03 NOTICE OF REVIVAL for only one Trademark dated 02-01-13
`04 REQUEST FOR REINSTATEMENT for other Trademark dated 02-05-13
`05 TTAB ORDER dated 08-08-11, remanding consolidated cases back to Examining Attorney
`06 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY dated 02-06-13
`07 PRELIMINARY RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY, with supporting 7 jpgs
`attached, dated 02-12-13
`08
`EMAIL RESPONSE dated 02-07-13
`from DEBORAH BLOCKER, PARALEGAL
`Attachment to email response dated 02-07-13
`by DEBORAH BLOCKER, PARALEGAL
`
`09
`
`
`
`Applicant’s Appeal Brief, June 3, 2013, EXHIBIT F
`Shimmering Ballerinas & Dancers, Serial # 76293326
`
`EX-014
`
`