Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`ESTTA773562
`
`Filing date:
`
`09/28/2016
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Proceeding
`
`91221326
`
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`
`Filer's Name
`
`Filer's e-mail
`
`Signature
`
`Date
`
`Plaintiff
`Hollywood Entertainment, LLC, dba Avalon and dba Bardot
`
`CHRISTIE GAUMER
`LAW OFFICES OF CHRISTIE GAUMER
`3940 LAUREL CANYON BLVD NO 733
`STUDIO CITY, CA 91604
`UNITED STATES
`christie@gaumerlaw.com
`
`Opposition/Response to Motion
`
`Christie Gaumer
`
`christie@gaumerlaw.com
`
`/Christie Gaumer/
`
`09/28/2016
`
`Attachments
`
`Bardot Opposition to MSJ.pdf(4495484 bytes )
`
`

`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`HOLLYWOOD ENTERTAINMENT, LLC
`dba AVALON and dba BARDOT
`
`OPPOSITION NO.: 91221326
`
`Serial No.: 86/243405
`
`Opposer,
`
`vs.
`
`0PPOSER’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION
`
`FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT;
`
`CITYCENTER LAND, LLC,
`
`‘
`
`DECLARATIONS AND EXHIBITS
`
`Applicant.
`
`Opposer HOLLYWOOD ENTERTAINMENT, LLC dba Avalon and dba
`
`BARDOT (“Opposer”) hereby submits its opposition to the motion for summary
`
`judgment filed by CITYCENTER LAND, LLC (“Applicant”). There are triable
`
`issues of fact, and the motion should be denied.
`
`1.
`
`Background Facts Showing Likelihood of Confusion
`
`Opposer owns and operates a nightclub in a historic location in Los Angeles,
`
`known as Avalon. John Lyons Declaration (“Lyons Dec1.), 1] 2. The manager of
`
`Opposer has been in the nightclub business for decades. Additionally, Opposer’s
`
`manager operates another business that installs light and sound systems for third
`
`parties. Id.
`
`Opposer began using the subject mark “Bardot” on December 1, 2008 in
`
`connection with an entertainment Venue for recorded and live music, which venue
`
`also serves food and beverages, including alcoholic beverages. See Amendment to
`
`Allege Use, Exhibit A; Lyons Decl., 1] 3. Opposer has continued to use that name
`
`since that date for its restaurant and bar business within the Bardot entertainment
`
`venue. Lyons Decl., 1] 3. The Bardot club is located within the building that houses
`
`Avalon. Bardot, as well as Avalon, attracts customers from the Los Angeles area
`
`and throughout the western region of the United States, including without
`
`1
`
`

`
`limitation Las Vegas, by featuring popular DJs and other performers. The Bardot
`
`club and restaurant/bar are well known, with nationally known celebrity clientele
`
`and having been featured in popular news media. Additionally, Bardot has a url
`
`website under that name, and has had such since 2008. Bardot too attracts
`
`customers from within and around Los Angeles as well as other national cities,
`
`such as Las Vegas. Lyons Decl.,1l 4.
`
`Applicant intends to open a restaurant in Las Vegas using the Bardot mark.
`
`The restaurant is located in the Citycenter complex. Opposer’s manager, through
`
`his other light and sound business, was hired to install light and sound equipment
`
`in the Citycenter complex, and did that installation. As a result, before adoption of
`
`the Bardot name, the Citycenter decision—makers knew or had reason to know of
`
`Opposer’s use of the Bardot mark through that work. Lyons Decl., 11 5.
`
`Applicant’s planned use as a restaurant and bar conflicts with Opposer’s use.
`
`There is a likelihood of confusion since the market is the same, namely that of a
`
`trendy audience of people who travel between Los Angeles and Las Vegas, and
`
`other similar entertainment-based cities. Lyons Decl., 1] 6. Therefore, Opposer filed
`
`its opposition.
`
`II.
`
`Discoveg — Requests for Admission
`
`On June 3, 2016, Applicant mail-served Opposer’s counsel with Requests
`
`for Admission. On July 5, 2016, Opposer served objections to those Requests for
`
`Admission. Christie Gaumer Declaration (“Gaumer Decl.”), j] 2, Exh. B
`
`(Objection). Prior to that time, counsel had been engaging in settlement
`
`communications. At the time the objections were served, Opposer’s counsel
`
`understood other counsel would be retained for Opposer, and so counsel served the
`
`objections. Gaumer Decl., 11 2.
`
`

`
`At no time did Applicant meet and confer concerning the objections or
`
`otherwise request responses. Further, settlement discussions simply ceased.
`
`Gaumer Decl., 11 3.
`
`Because Opposer served the objections, there is no authority to deem the
`
`Requests for Admissions admitted. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a)(4) (no request was
`
`admitted, and there was no failure to respond).
`
`III.
`
`Statement of Disputed Facts
`
`The following sets forth the counter position to the facts Applicant claims
`
`were admitted.
`
`1. App1icant’s statement: Neither Opposer nor its subsidiaries, parents,
`
`affiliates, licenses, and their representative officers, directors, employees,
`
`agents, and predecessor-in-interest (the “Opposer Parties”) currently
`
`operate a restaurant under the name BARDOT.
`
`Opposer’s Counter Statement: The Amendment to Allege Use filed
`
`September 12, 2014, and its accompanying declaration, show use dating
`
`back to December 1, 2008. Also, the attached declaration shows use
`
`dating back to December 1, 2008 through the present. Lyons Decl., 1] 3.
`
`No fact was admitted. See Exhibit B (Objection).
`
`2. Applicant’s Statement: The Opposer Parties have not operated a
`
`restaurant under the name BARDOT since December of 2008.
`
`Opposer’s Counter Statement: The Amendment to Allege Use filed
`
`September 12, 2014, and its accompanying declaration, show use dating
`
`back to December 1, 2008. Also, the attached declaration shows use
`
`dating back to December 1, 2008 through the present. Lyons Decl., 11 3.
`
`No fact was admitted. See Exhibit B (Objection).
`
`

`
`3. Applicant’s Statement: The Opposer Parties do not currently operate a
`
`bar under the name BARDOT.
`
`Opposer’s Counter Statement: The Amendment to Allege Use filed
`
`September 12, 2014, and its accompanying declaration, show use dating
`
`back to December 1, 2008. Also, the attached declaration shows use
`
`dating back to December 1, 2008 through the present. Lyons Decl., 1] 3.
`
`No fact was admitted. See Exhibit B (Objection).
`
`4. Applicant’s Statement: The Opposer Parties have not operated a bar
`
`under the name BARDOT since December of 2008.
`
`Opposer’s Counter Statement: The Amendment to Allege Use filed
`
`September 12, 2014, and its accompanying declaration, show use dating
`
`back to December 1, 2008. Also, the attached declaration shows use
`
`dating back to December 1, 2008 through the present. Lyons Decl., 3. No
`
`fact was admitted. See Exhibit B (Objection).
`
`5. Applicant’s Statement: The consumers of the services that the Opposer
`
`Parties offer under the BARDOT mark are sophisticated.
`
`Opposer’s Counter Statement: The users are not sophisticated. Lyons
`
`Decl., ll 4 (describing the nature of the customers as general consumers).
`
`No fact was admitted. See Exhibit B (Objection).
`
`6. Applicant’s Statement: The Opposer Parties are not aware of any instance
`
`of actual confusion due to the Opposer Parties’ use of BARDOT and
`
`Applicant’s use of BARDOT.
`
`Opposer’s Counter Statement: No fact was admitted. See Exhibit B
`
`(Objection).
`
`7. Applicant’s Statement: There is no likelihood of confusion as to the
`
`source or sponsorship of the goods and services designated by the
`
`
`
`

`
`Opposer Parties’ BARDOT mark and the goods and services designated
`
`by Applicant’s BARDOT Mark.
`
`Opposer’s Counter Statement: Given the same name, the same services,
`
`the same customer base, and a similar market, namely the entertainment
`
`customer of the Los Angeles and Las Vegas region, there is a likelihood
`
`of confusion. Lyons Dec1., W 4, 6.
`
`IV.
`
`Summary Judgment Should Be Denied
`
`A. Standard for Summag Judgment
`
`Summary judgment is only appropriate where there are no genuine issues of
`
`material fact in dispute, thus leaving the case to be resolved as a matter of law. See
`
`Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). The Board does not resolve issues of fact on summary
`
`judgment; it only determines whether a genuine issue exists. Meyers v. Brook Shoe
`
`Inc., 912 F.2d 1459, 1461 (Fed. Cir. 1990), overruled on other grounds by A.C.
`
`Aukerman Co. v. R.I. Chaides Consz‘r., 960 F.2d 1020, 1038-39 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
`
`Applicant, as the moving party, has the burden of demonstrating the absence
`
`of any genuine issue of material fact. See Celotex Corp. v. Catretz‘, 477 U.S. 317,
`
`322-37 (1986). To prevail on its motion, Applicant must establish that there is no
`
`genuine issue of fact regarding the issues at hand by clear and convincing
`
`evidence. See H. Marvin Ginn Corp. v. Int 7 Ass ’n ofFire Chiefs, Inc., 782 F.2d
`
`986, 989-90 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
`
`For its part, in order to have the opportunity to submit proofs at trial,
`
`Opposer need only show that, on the evidence of record, a reasonable fact finder
`
`could resolve the matter in its favor. See Opryiand USA Inc. v. Great Am. Music
`
`Show Inc., 970 F.2d 847, 850 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Olde Tyme Foods Inc. v. Roundry’s
`
`Inc., 961 F.2d 200, 202 (Fed. Cir. 1992); see also Visa Int 7 Serv. Ass ’n v. Life-
`
`Code Sys., Inc., 200 U.S.P.Q. 740 (T.T.A.B. 1983) (on a summaryjudgment
`
`motion, “nonmoving party is not required to adduce evidence sufficient to prove its
`
`5
`
`

`
`case. . .” it need only show “there is a genuine issue as to a material fact and that,
`
`therefore, there is a need for trial”). The evidence should be viewed in a light most
`
`favorable to Opposer as the nonmovant, and all justifiable inferences should be
`
`drawn in Opposer’s favor. See Lloyd ’s Food Prods Inc. v. Eli ’s Inc, 987 F.2d 766,
`
`767 (Fed. Cir. 1993); Opryland USA, 970 F.2d at 850. Using those standards, as
`
`explained below, Oppose should prevail here.
`
`B. Opposer Has Prior Rights in the Mark
`
`To establish priority, Opposer will show that it has a prior use in the Bardot
`
`mark. See Herbko Int’! v. Kappa Books, Inc., 308 F.2d 1156 (Fed. Cir. 2002); Otto
`
`Roth & Co. 12. Universal Foods Corp., 208 U.S.P.Q. 40 (C.C.P.A. 1981) (priority
`
`established by proprietary rights).As Applicant admits in its motion, proprietary
`
`rights may be established by prior use of a trade name. Id.
`
`Importantly, there was no admission as there was an obj ection served.
`
`Gaumer Decl., 11 2; Exh. B. Moreover, the attached declaration confirms the facts
`
`that Opposer used and is still using the Bardot mark in connection with a restaurant
`
`and bar as well as an entertainment venue. Lyons Decl., 1] 3. That use commenced
`
`December 1, 2008, long before Applicant’s intended use. Id. As such, Opposer has
`
`priority.
`
`C. Likelihood of Confusion Exists
`
`The test for likelihood of confiision entails an analysis of thirteen facts as are
`
`set forth in In re E.I. du Pom‘ de Nemours & Co. 476 F.2d 1357 (C.C.P.A. 1973).
`
`Those factors include the following:
`
`1. The similarity or dissimilarity of the marks in their entireties as to
`appearance, sound, connotation, and commercial impression;
`2. The similarity or dissimilarity and nature of the goods
`described in an
`application or registration or in connection with which a prior mark is in
`use;
`
`
`
`

`
`3. The similarity or dissimilarity of established, likely—to-continue trade
`channels;
`The conditions under which and buyers to whom sales are made, i.e.
`"impulse" vs. careful, sophisticated purchasing;
`The fame of the prior mark;
`The number and nature of similar marks in use on similar goods;
`The nature and extent of any actual confusion;
`The length of time during and the conditions under which there has been
`concurrent use without evidence of actual confusion;
`9. The variety of goods on which a mark is or is not used;
`l0.The market interface between the applicant and the owner of a prior
`
`P 9
`
`°.\‘.°‘E"
`
`mark;.
`ll.The extent to which applicant has a right to exclude others from use of its
`mark on its goods;
`l2.The extent of potential confusion, and
`13.Any other established fact probative of the effect of use.
`
`Id. Not all of the DuPont factors may be relevant or of equal weight in any given
`
`case, and “any one of the factors may control a particular case.” In re Dixie Rests,
`
`Inc. 105 F.3d 1405, 1406-07 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
`
`Applicant’s arguments regarding the alleged admissions should be rejected.
`
`Indeed, Applicant already has the Amendment to Allege Use, filed in Opposer’s
`
`trademark application (Serial no. 86245158) on September 14, 2014, itself
`
`containing the declaration with the attached instances of use showing the mark.
`
`With that Amendment, plus the attached Lyons declaration, there are genuine
`
`disputes as to many of the factors.
`
`For instance, as to the first four factors the marks are identical; both are
`
`“Bardot”, and therefore, also sound the same. The marks are for the same services
`
`— bar and restaurant, and are sold to such customers, essentially the general public,
`
`lacking technical sophistication. Further, as to the fifth factor — the fame of the
`
`mark, Opposer’s Bardot mark was the subject of press attention, with celebrity
`
`type clientele customers. See Exhibit A (showing press clippings and attendance at
`
`
`
`

`
`Opposer’s Bardot club/restaurant/bar by celebrities who themselves garnered press
`
`attention for their patronage). Further, the market is similar, namely the Los
`
`Angeles and Las Vegas market for public entertainment, a market with substantial
`
`cross sell. Lyons Decl., 1] 6. The likelihood of confusion is therefore great and
`
`certainly a question of fact.
`
`V.
`
`Conclusion.
`
`Because there are questions of fact as to priority and likelihood of confusion,
`
`the motion for summary judgment should be denied.
`
`Dated: September 28, 2016
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` Attorney for Oppor HOLLYWOOD
`
`ENTERTAINMENT, LLC dba AVALON
`
`and dba BARDOT
`
`

`
`DECLARATION OF JOHN LYONS
`
`I, John Lyons, declare:
`
`1.
`
`I am the Managing Member of Hollywood Entertainment, LLC,
`
`Opposer herein. The facts set forth are of my own personal knowledge, except
`
`those set forth on information and belief which I believe to be true, and if called as
`
`a witness, I could and would competently testify to the following.
`
`2.
`
`As the Managing Member of Opposer, I have knowledge of its
`
`business and operations. I manage day-to-day operations as well as all major
`
`decisions. I have been in the nightclub and ancillary restaurant and bar business for
`
`many decades. Additionally, I own another entity that installs light and sound
`
`systems for third parties.
`
`3.
`
`Opposer owns and operates a nightclub in a historic location in Los
`
`Angeles, known as Avalon. Opposer began using the subject mark “Bardot” on
`
`December 1, 2008 in connection with an entertainment venue for recorded and live
`
`music, which venue also serves food and beverages, including alcoholic beverages.
`
`Opposer has continued to use that name since that date to the present for its
`
`restaurant and bar business within the Bardot entertainment Venue. The Bardot
`
`club is located within the building that houses Avalon.
`
`4.
`
`Bardot, as well as Avalon, attracts customers from the Los Angeles
`
`area and throughout the western region of the United States, including without
`
`limitation Las Vegas, by featuring popular DJs and other performers. The Bardot
`
`club and restaurant/bar are well known, with nationally known celebrity clientele
`
`and having been featured in popular news media. Attached as Exhibit A are true
`
`and correct copies of press clippings showing Bardot’s reputation and photographs
`
`showing the space. Additionally, Bardot has a url website under that name, and has
`
`
`
`

`
`had such since 2008. Bardot too attracts customers from within and around Los
`
`Angeles as well as other national cities, such as Las Vegas.
`
`5.
`
`I am informed that Applicant Citycenter intends to open a restaurant
`
`in Las Vegas using the Bardot mark. The restaurant is located in the Citycenter
`complex. Through my other light and sound business, I was hired to install light
`
`and sound equipment in the Citycenter complex, and did that installation. As a
`
`result, before adoption of the Bardot name, the Citycenter decision-makers knew or
`
`had reason to know of Opposer’s use of the Bardot mark through that work.
`
`6.
`
`Given my knowledge of the Los Angeles and Las Vegas
`
`entertainment markets, Applicant’s planned use as a restaurant and bar conflicts
`
`with Opposer’s use. There is a likelihood of confusion since the market is the
`
`same, namely that of a trendy audience of people who travel between Los Angeles
`
`and Las Vegas, and other similar entertainment-based cities.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that
`
`the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration is executed this 28th day
`
`of September, 2016, at Los Angeles, California
`
`
`
`

`
`DECLARATION OF CHRISTIE GAUMER
`
`1, Christie Gaumer, declare:
`
`l.
`
`I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of
`
`California and am counsel for Hollywood Entertainment, LLC, Opposer
`
`herein. The facts set forth are of my own personal knowledge, except those
`
`set forth on information and belief which I believe to be true, and if called as
`
`a witness, I could and would competently testify to the following.
`
`2.
`
`On June 3, 2016, I am informed that Applicant mail-served me
`
`with Requests for Admission. On July 5, 2016, for Opposer, I served
`
`objections to those Requests for Admission. Prior to that time, I had been
`
`engaging in settlement communications with Applicant’s counsel. At the
`
`time the objections were served, I understood other counsel would be
`
`retained for Opposer, and so I served the objections. A true and correct copy
`
`of the objections are attached as Exhibit B.
`
`3.
`
`At no time did Applicant’s counsel meet and confer concerning
`
`the objections or otherwise request responses. Further, settlement
`
`discussions simply ceased.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States
`
`that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration is executed this
`
`28”‘ day of September, 2016, at Los Angeles, Califo
`
`ll
`
`

`
`EXHIBIT “A”
`
`

`
`PTO Form 1523 4 Rev ‘J/ZEUS!
`OMB Mr‘,
`[‘.F\51—0T154(Ex[. 1L’”'3'|/2C|1T)
`
`Trademark/Service Mark Amendment to Allege Use
`
`(15 U.S.C. Section 1051(c))
`
`The table below presents the data as entered.
`
`Input Field
`
`[LAW oFF1(5E it ' 0
`
`‘LEXTENLSION on /Elsi:
`MARK SECTION
`L
`
`
`
`
`Us1i>To-GENE TED
`
`MARK STALTEEISVIVENT
`»
`’
`OWNER SECTION
`
`I
`
`H
`
`
`
`L
`
`STREET
`ICITY
`lsuirui
`Iyziii/pyosmn/ac im
`
`
`0
`
`
`
`
`
`mom]:
`
`I
`
`_
`‘
`y
`_
`‘
`EMAIL,
`GOODS AND/OR SERVICES SECTION
`
`all LAW OFFICE 113
`a NO
`
`, http://tsdr.uspto.gov/img/86245158/large
`
`BARDOT
`
`-‘YES
`
`YES
`
`
`
`1
`
`‘ The mark consists of standard characters, without claim to any particular font
`t
`.
`style, size or color.
`
`Dean, Dave
`
`1645 Vine Stree, No. 810
`
`y Los Angeles
`5 California
`e 90028
`United States
`, 323-464-7300
`
`7
`
`’ davedean@giantclub.com
`
`7
`
`1NTEnNATibNAL cyLAfss
`
`it
`
`
`
`1 041
`I.’
`1‘ I Entertainment venue, namely, nightclub featuring recorded and/or live music
`
`1 KEEP ALL LISTED
`GOODS 1o1i§SERvrCE
`I 12/01/2008
`
`.FIRsT;I1si: AN
`n‘:;;u::1_m-1::
`12/01/2008
`
`FIRST USE; A
`L}
`SPECIMEN FILE NAME(S)
`
`1
`
`Jpc s)i 01
`
`
`
`
`
`0
`
`40
`
`0
`
`ii AAU0006.JPG 1
`
`
`
`’\\TlCRS\EXPORTl6\IMAGEOUT l6\862\451\86245158\xml5\
`
`\\TlCRS'\EXPORT16\IMAGEOUT16\862\45 l\862451 5x\x1n15\/§Au00o7.JPG
`
`\\TlCRS\EXPORTl6\lMAGEOUT16\862'\.451\86245158\xml5\AAU0008.JPG
`
`\\TlCRS\EXPORT16\lMAGEOUT16\862\45l\86245l58‘xml5\AAU0009.JPG
`
`
`
`ifl
`
`

`
`'
`
`\\TICRS\EXPORTl6\IMAGEOUTl 6\862\45 1\86245 l58\xml5\AAUOO l 0.]PG
`
`5
`
`SPNO-67201948—201409l2l8585l35l2l0 . 01 07 l0-Bardot—Prince.p_¢_if
`
`72 . \\TlCRS\EXPORT l 6\IMAGEOUT l 6\862\45 1 \86245 1 5 8\xml5\AAU0002.JPG
`
`5 SPNO—6720l948—20140912185851351210 . 2009-Bartdot-Tog 5—LA—
`HOTLlST.pdf
`
`ii}
`
`\\TICRS\EXPORT16\lMAGEOUTl6\862\45 l\8 6245 l 58\xml5\AAU0003 .JPG
`
`ii i SPNO-67201948-20140912185851351210 . 12 05 08-Bardot—NYTimes.pdf
`
`, ‘ ii V \\TICRS\EXPORTl6\IMAGEOUTl6\862\451\86245l58\xml5\AAU0004.JPG
`
`5
`
`I \\TICRS\EXPORTl 6\IMAGEOUTl6\862\45l\86245 l58\xml5\AAU00O5.JPG
`ii
`i
`,4 7 Logo used as signage as shown on backdrop of live music stage, backdrop of
`live music stage (as shown in photos), showing mark, flyers showing mark and
`use, newspaper articles discussing mark as used.
`
`it 043
`
`5
`_ V.
`V’
`
`Food establishment, namely, cafe, restaurant; bar and cocktail lounge services;
`hotel services; hospitality services, namely, hotel restaurant reservation
`services, hotel services for preferred customers
`
`KEEP ALL LISTED
` 12/01/2008
`
`V
`ms: user
`SPECIMEN FILE NAME(S)
`
`jimi:
`
`0 mfg 12/01/2008
`
`'
`
`\\TlCRS\EXPORTl6\IMAGEOUT l6\862\45l\86245l58\xml5\
`V AAU00l5.JPG
`
`‘V
`
`1
`
`ii \\TICRS\EXPORT16\IMAGEOUTl6\862\45l\86245l58\xml5\AAUO0l6.JPG
`
`2‘
`
`3 SPNl-6720l948—20l40912l85851351210 . 01 07 l0-Bard0t—Prince._[fl'
`
`i
`
`-i \\TICRS\EXPORTl 6\IMAGEOUTl6\.862\45 l\86245 l 58\xml5\AAU00l l.JPG
`
`12 05 08—Bardot-NYTimes. df
`SPNI-6720l948—20l409l2l85851351210 .
`
`\\TICRS\EXPORT l 6\IMAGEOUT l 6\862\45 l\86245 1 58\xml5\AAUOO l 2.JPG
`
`
`
`5
`
`5
`
`i» ,2
`
`[
`
`-
`
`I \\TlCRS\EXPORTl6\IMAGEOUT16\862\45l\86245l58\xml5\AAU0013.JPG
`
` {:PNl—67201948—20140912185851351210 . 2009—Bartdot-To 5—LA—
`IlOTLIST.Qdf
`
`NO
`
`
`
`- l
`ES
`ixfoiunnnor
`0 Mon T;~[ALI4l53i<i3iAil7i:lION0ill5f1l1SIiie
`
`, 200
`
`\\TlCRS\EXPORTl6\lMAGEOUTl6\862\45l\86245158\xml5\AAUOOl4.JPG
`
`Flyers, newspapers clippings describing the venue and its use.
`
`

`
`$ SIGNATURE SECTION
`
`/dave dean/
`
` I Applicant
`
`Dave Dean
`
`“ 09/12/2014
`
`“:7 (323)464-7333
`
`
`
`I FILING INFORMATION
`
`
` I, Fri Sep 12 19:33:50 EDT 2014
`
` a; USPTO/AAU—XX.XXX.X.XX-201
`
`.
`
`409121933S0525227-8624515
`‘8-500c6379ee0ccd664fd97f9
`' 899d0400t386864887a24eb4b
`2ca977d6f7b3848-CC-5384-2
`
`_ 01409121858513512l0
`
`

`
`3T0 Form 1553 (Rev 9/2005)
`ow No 0651111154 (Exp. 10/31/2017)
`
`To the Commissioner for Trademarks:
`
`Trademark/Service Mark Amendment to Allege Use
`
`(15 U.S.C. Section 105l(c))
`
`MARK: BARDOT(Standard Characters, see http://tsdr.uspto.gov/img/86245158/large)
`SERIAL NUMBER: 86245158
`
`The applicant, Dean, Dave, having an address of
`1645 Vine Stree, No. 810
`Los Angeles, California 90028
`United States
`
`is submitting the following allegation of use information:
`
`For International Class 041:
`Current identification: Entertainment venue, namely, nightclub featuring recorded and/or live music
`
`The mark is in use in commerce on or in connection with all of the goods/services, or to indicate membership in the collective organization listed
`in the application or Notice of Allowance or as subsequently modified for this specific class.
`
`The mark was first used by the applicant, or the applicant's related company, licensee, or predecessor in interest at least as early as 12/01/2008,
`and first used in commerce at least as early as 12/01/2008, and is now in use in such commerce. The applicant is submitting one specimen for the
`class showing the mark as used in commerce on or in connection with any item in the class, consisting of a(n) Logo used as signage as shown on
`backdrop of live music stage, backdrop of live music stage (as shown in photos), showing mark, flyers showing mark and use, newspaper articles
`discussing mark as used..
`
`J PG file(s):
`Specimen Filel
`Specimen File2
`Specimen File3
`Specimen File4
`Specimen Fi1e5
`Original PDF file:
`SPNO-67201948—20l409l2l8585l35l2l0 . 01 07 10-Bardot—Prince.pdf
`Converted PDF file(s) (1 page)
`Specimen Filel
`Original PDF file:
`SPNO-6'/201948-201409l2l8585135l2l0 . 2009-Bartdot-Top 5-LA-HOTLlST.pdf
`Converted PDF t'ile(s) (1 page)
`Specimen Filel
`Original PDF file:
`SPNO-67201948-20140912185851351210 . 12 05 08-Bardot-NYTimes.pdf
`Converted PDF file(s) (2 pages)
`Specimen Filel
`Specimen File2
`
`For International Class 043:
`Current identification: Food establishment, namely, cafe, restaurant; bar and cocktail lounge services; hotel services; hospitality services, namely,
`hotel restaurant reservation services, hotel services for preferred customers
`
`The mark is in use in commerce on or in connection with all of the goods/services, or to indicate membership in the collective organization listed
`in the application or Notice of Allowance or as subsequently modified for this specific class.
`
`The mark was first used by the applicant, or the applicant's related company, licensee, or predecessor in interest at least as early as 12/01/2008,
`and first used in commerce at least as early as 12/01/2008, and is now in use in such commerce. The applicant is submitting one specimen for the
`
`,
`
`l,E,
`
`\
`
`

`
`class showing the mark as used in commerce on or in connection with any item in the class, consisting of a(n) Flyers, newspapers clippings
`describing the venue and its use..
`
`JPG file(s):
`Specimen Filel
`Specimen File2
`Original PDF file:
`SPN1-67201948—20140912185851351210 . 01 07 10-Bardot—Prince.pdf
`Converted PDF file(s) (1 page)
`Specimen Filel
`Original PDF file:
`SPN1—67201948-2014091218585 1351210 . 12 05 08—Bardot-NYTimes.pdf
`Converted PDF file(s) (2 pages)
`Specimen Filel
`Specimen Fi1e2
`Original PDF file:
`SPN1—6720l948—20140912185 851351210 . 2009-Bartdot-Top_5—LA—HOTLIST.pdf
`Converted PDF file(s) (1 page)
`Specimen Filel
`
`The applicant is not filing a Request to Divide with this Allegation of Use form.
`
`A fee payment in the amount of $200 will be submitted with the form, representing payment for the allegation of use for 2 classes.
`
`Declaration
`
`STATEMENTS: The signatory believes that: if the applicant is filing the amendment to allege use under 15 U.S.C. Section 105 l(c) or a
`statement of use under 15 U.S.C. Section l05l(d), the applicant is the owner of the trademark/service mark sought to be registered; the applicant
`or the applicant's related company or licensee is using the mark in commerce on or in connection with all the goods/services in the application or
`notice of allowance, or as subsequently modified, and such use by the applicant's related company or licensee inures to the benefit of the
`applicant; that to the best of the signatory's knowledge and belief, no other person has the right to use the mark in commerce, either in the
`identical form or in such near resemblance as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods/services of such other person, to cause
`confusion or mistake, or to deceive; and the specimen(s) shows the mark as used on or in connection with the goods/services in commerce.
`
`DECLARATION: The signatory being warned that willful false statements and the like are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under
`18 U.S.C. Section 1001, and that such willful false statements and the like may jeopardize the validity of the application or submission or any
`registration resulting therefrom, declares that all statements made of his/her own knowledge are true and that all statements made on information
`and belief are believed to be true.
`
`Date Signed: 09/12/2014
`Signature: /dave dean/
`Signatory‘s Name: Dave Dean
`Signatory‘s Position: Applicant
`Signatory‘s Phone: (323) 464-7333
`
`RAM Sale Number: 86245158
`
`RAM Accounting Date: 09/15/2014
`
`Serial Number: 86245158
`lntemet Transmission Date: Fri Sep 12 19:33:50 EDT 2014
`TEAS Stamp: USPTO/AAU-XX.XXX.X.XX-201409121933505252
`27-86245158—500c6379ee0ccd664fd9719899d0
`400f386864887a24eb4b2ea977d6f7b3848—CC—5
`384-20l409l2l8585135l2l0
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`~ Miley Cyrus: ‘Like, I
`didn't even think
`about‘ the VMAs
`spectacle
`
`Charlie Hunnain,
`Dakota Johnson
`and the ‘Fifty
`Shades‘ of reactions
`
`Kate Upton named
`model of the year,
`covers Vanity Fair
`
`
`
`
`
`MINISTRY OF GOSSIP
`TRE CEQSPEL ON CELEBRSTY AND $30? CUi.T1.}i?E
`
` 5:»;.§
`
`
`
`Prince and Pussycat Doll Nicole Scherzinger party after the People's Choice Awards
`January 7, 2010 E 1:12 pm
`
`Cobra Starship People's Choice Awards Ht)
`Q my
`_.
`
`~
`
`Some Pussycats have all the luck
`
`The Ministry has learned that on~2md—o1"f Pussycat Dolls front woman Nicole Scherzinger got an A-list treat after
`her People's Choice Awards performance Wednesday night: a private audience with Prince at Bardot Hollywood.
`
`The singers had the Jason Sooppa-run spot opened just for their purposes -- something the Purple One is fond of
`doing (he even hosted his recent Christmas Eve bash there, with about 50 guests).
`
`Prince and Scherziuger listened to music and hung out with the likes of the Black Eyed Peas’ VVill.I.A1n until about 4
`41,111., a partygoer said.
`
`
`
`Check out Nicole's People's Choice Awards performance —— that's the video embedded above -- then get arrivals photos of Taylor Laumer, Dealt Michelle,
`Carrie Underwood, Mary J. Blige and more how.
`
`-— Matt Donnelly
`
`Photo: Nicole Scherzinger arrives at the Peoplek Choice Awards. Credit: Nina Prommer/ EPA.
`
`Related award-show dispnlches from the Ministry of Gossip:
`
`Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart say yes to cheap dates, no to the People's Choice Awards
`
`Marion (‘ot'illnrd‘ Sean Penn and Quentin Taraiitiiio hit {lite Pahn Sprin-gs liitei'mitio:izil Film P‘esti\'aé awards
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`Best Live Mllsic Venue - Top 5 (2009)
`
`B zocs
`
`2-
`VOTERS LOVE
`FIND IT
`I737 Vine St
`Los Angeles. cnsooaa
`(323) nausea
`¥imv.En2m_-
`
`
`
`()
`
`httpzlIIa.cityvoter.ccm/best/|ive—rnusic~venuelnightiifeI|os—angeles/sIideshow/2009
`
`Page 1 of4
`
`
`
`

`
`ES
`
`TODAWS PAPER . ZIEEO gfl
`
` ’
`
`’p5s3L3LXs§ ‘ was rop.¢s_;_
`
`Eh: Km york Etmes
`
`Subscribe: Digital I Home Delivery '-Log in ‘ Register Now
`Search All NYfimcs.ocm
`“Ml
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`Fashion & Style
`TECHNOLOGY
`SCIEN(7E.
`Hl~L.-\l.'l‘H
`SPORTS V OPINION Z ARTS mu 5 TRAVEL i JOBS REAL ESTATE AUTOS ‘
`2 worm us. 1 N.Y./REGION: Buslmass
`FASHION & STYLE DINENG & WlNE HOME & GARDEN WEDDINGSICELEBRATIONS
`T MAGAZINE
`
`
`
`
`
`aoirs
`Your Table Is Ready, Mrs. Guggenheim
`
`More Articles in Fashion 8. Style I)
`
`3 M!.?¢i3!.l
`
`
`
`Stephan Dam» for The New York firnes
`SRIGETTE WOULD APPROVE Bartlet. A new duh, man‘: so: out to he a catabrity hangout l3i:i wound up being one anyway,
`By SAMANTHA BONAR
`Puhlishod Deremtiev5,2i)05
`
`;
`3
`
`rwnrrsa
`LlNKEDiN
`
`Los Angeles
`
`“HONES'I'l..Y, Fm just here. to try the mac ’n" cheese,” insisted Phil Kim, at the
`time the Hollywood After Dark columnist for the National Enquirer, sitting
`«
`‘ alone and sticking out like the broken foot he was nursing. “It’s getting a lot of
`buzz.
`
`Uh-huh. What's generating the noise is not cheddary pasta hut where it is found,
`the new dub Bardot, nestled in the former Spider Club space in the old Avalon
`Theater on Vine Street.
`
`Several drinks later, Mr. Kim (who moved to Us Weekly last month) confided his
`real mission: He was scouting for celebrities, who would — he hoped ~ be
`'
`‘ behaving badly.
`
`SlGNiNTOE-
`MMLORSAVE
`THIS
`PRINT
`REPRINTS
`SHARE
`
`B A R
`.
`l: VV
`
`,
`
`.
`K) R l\
`
`smw wow
`
`
`
`ililfifl ziizmi
`
`Mast POPULAR
`
`He seemed about to cash i.n. Later that Monday night, a scant week after Ea.rdot’s opening, Ryan Gosling
`would man the turntables, Liv Tyler would hang out in the tented semi-outdoor area with n
`and Steve Bing, and Mischa Barton would totter from table to booth.
`
`But the management of the club, created by night life veteran John Lyons (House of Blues, Avalon,
`Spider Club, Honey), blanched when they learned there was a tabloid reporter in the hizzy.
`
`‘I EMAILED =
`aroceeo ‘ SEARCHED 3 VIEWED
`1. Well: Some Frnits Are Bet-ter'l‘h.an Others
`2. A Multitasking Video Game Makes Old Brains Act Younger
`3. Brutality of Syrian Rebels Posing Dilemma in West
`4. NICHOLAS D, KRISTOF: The Right Questions on Syria
`5. N.S.A. Foils Much Internet Encryption
`6. Op—Ed Contributor: Not Very Giving
`
`It is not Bardot’s intention to become a hip celebrity hangout. The designer of the three-room lounge,
`> David Touster, said he keyed 05 the Avalon S 19205 architecture to create a space where both Lauren
`Conrad and
`would feel comfortable.” A spot where celebrities and the hm polloi, old
`‘ and young, the attractive and, well, the attractive, could all gather — if not together, at least in the same
`vicinity. The idea was to create a cool sanctuary for those in the know, and keep it on the down low.
`
`V
`
`7' ggséadge “fP°"°"5’* at the C"’"°" "fa Deb“°“ F°°d
`8' Famng Economic Tide in mam ls mposmg ks Chronic
`Troubles
`
`9. State of ll1eArt: No Strings on a Piano, but the Tune lsGrand
`1o. In San Francisco, Itfi€“‘s Rich Club, Poor Club
`
`‘I wanted it to look like the kind of place Peggy Guggenheim or Doris Duke would design if they wanted
`a nightclub where they could hang out with their friends,’ Mr. Touster said.
`
`: Goto Complete Last A»
`
`=
`
`Indeed, Bardot — with its plush couches, multicolored glass and wrougl1t—iron light fixtures, its eclectic
`mix of antique and modern tables and assortment ofvinlagc oil portraits of dogs, ii subtle nod to Bgjgijie
`Barrlnt, an animal lover — looks like the kind of place an eccentric wealthy older woman threw together
`‘ with pieces from her attic.
`
`
`
`

`
` iinnnied, and disappeared. Feeling like an iulrniier, the tnbloid reporter polished off his mac: 'n' cheese and Sl1a1l1(‘fi1{'t'.'&ly hobbled
`
`
`1 Chef Jared Simon delivered small plates of steak tartare and sezired scallops, nibbles he cal