`ESTTA90671
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`07/19/2006
`
`Filing date:
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`91170957
`Plaintiff
`CENTRAL MFG. CO.
`LEO STOLLER
`CENTRAL MFG. CO.
`7115 W. North Avenue #272
`Oak Park, IL 60302
`UNITED STATES
`ldms4@hotmail.com
`Opposition/Response to Motion
`Leo Stoller
`ldms4@hotmail.com
`/Leo Stoller/
`07/19/2006
`heparesponsemsj.pdf ( 3 pages )(10786 bytes )
`
`Proceeding
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`Filer's Name
`Filer's e-mail
`Signature
`Date
`Attachments
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`CENTRAL MFG. CO.,
`
`Opposer,
`
`Opposition No: 91170957
`
`V.
`
`Mark: STEALTH
`
`HEPA CORPORATION,
`
`Application SN: 75—718,440
`
`Applicant.
`
`PRELIMINARY RESPONSE TO APPL|CANT’S
`
`MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
`and FOR INSTRUCTIONS
`
`NOW COMES the Opposer in response to Applicant’s Motion for
`
`Summary Judgment, and states follows:
`
`The Applicant filed a Motion to Strike Certain Portions of the Notice of
`
`Opposition and Motion to Dismiss Under Rule 12 FRCP, and Applicant’s Motion
`
`For a More Definite Statement on June 19, 2006. The Board normally considers
`
`the proceedings suspended once a motion to dismiss has been filed.
`
`Consequently, the Opposer considers the proceeding suspended once the two
`
`motions of June 19”‘ were filed. Thus, the Opposer should not be required to
`
`respond to a motion for summary judgment filed on July 13, 2006.
`
`Furthermore, the filing of Applicant’s Motion for Summary Judgment
`
`clearly vitiates Applicant’s Motion for a More Definite Statement.
`
`It appears that
`
`
`
`the Applicant ‘s Motion for a More Definite Statement is frivolous on its face, in
`
`that the Applicant’s filing of its Motion for Summary Judgment tells the Board that
`
`the Applicant does not need a more definite statement of anything.
`
`WHEREFORE, the Opposer prays that the Board grant the Opposer thirty
`
`days from the decision on Applicant’s Motion to Strike Strike Certain Portions of
`
`the Notice of Opposition and Motion to Dismiss Under Rule 12 FRCP, and
`
`Applicant’s Motion For a More Definite Statement to fully respond to Applicant’s
`
`Motion for Summary Judgment.
`
`RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
`
`/Leo Stoller/
`
`Leo Stoller, President
`
`CENTRAL MFG. CO., Opposer
`7115 W. North Avenue #272
`
`Oak Park, Illinois 60302
`
`(773) 589-0340
`
`Date:
`
`July 19, 2006
`
`
`
`Certificate of On-Line Filing
`
`I hereby certify that on July 19, 2006 this paper is being
`filed online in this case with the Trademark Trial and
`
`Appeal Board.
`
`/Leo Stoller/President
`
`Certificate of Service
`
`I hereby certify that on July 19, 2006 a copy of the foregoing
`was sent by First Class mail with the U.S. Postal Service in an
`envelope addressed to:
`
`Louis J. Bachand
`
`Attorney at Law
`P.O. Box 1508
`
`La Canada, CA 91012-5508
`
`Leo Stoller, President
`
`Date: July 19, 2006