throbber
ESTTA Tracking number:
`
`ESTTA1338403
`
`Filing date:
`
`02/06/2024
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Proceeding no.
`
`91289137
`
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`address
`
`Defendant
`Zhejiang Tianqi Electric Co., Ltd.
`
`NAZLY AILEEN BAYRAMOGLU
`BAYRAMOGLU LAW OFFICES LLC
`1540 WEST WARM SPRINGS ROAD SUITE 100
`HENDERSON, NV 89014
`UNITED STATES
`Primary email: tm@bayramoglu-legal.com
`Secondary email(s): nazly@bayramoglu-legal.com,
`alex@bayramoglu-legal.com, david@bayramoglu-legal.com, den-
`iz@bayramoglu-legal.com
`702-462-5973
`
`Submission
`
`Filer's name
`
`Filer's email
`
`Signature
`
`Date
`
`Answer
`
`David Silver
`
`tm@bayramoglu-legal.com, nazly@bayramoglu-legal.com,
`alex@bayramoglu-legal.com, david@bayramoglu-legal.com
`
`/David Silver/
`
`02/06/2024
`
`Attachments
`
`Answer to Notice of Opposition No 91289137 re TIBOX.pdf(89453 bytes )
`
`

`

`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Fibox Oy AB,
`
`Opposer,
`
`vs.
`
`Zhejiang Tianqi Electric Co., Ltd.,
`
`Applicant.
`
`Opposition Proceeding No.: 91289137
`
`Serial No.: 79363173
`
`
`Mark:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES OF APPLICANT
`
`
`
`Zhejiang Tianqi Electric Co., Ltd. (“Applicant”), by and through its attorneys, Bayramoglu
`
`Law Offices LLC, hereby answers the Notice of Opposition (the “Opposition”) filed by Fibox Oy
`
`AB (“Opposer”) in the above-referenced opposition proceeding as follows:
`
`To the extent the cover sheet of the Opposition is deemed to contain allegations requiring
`
`a response, Applicant denies these allegations. To the extent the unnumbered paragraphs in the
`
`Opposition are deemed to contain allegations requiring a response, Applicant denies these
`
`allegations. To the extent not explicitly admitted, all allegations in the Opposition are denied.
`
`ANSWER
`
`1.
`
`Applicant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 1 of the Opposition and, on that basis, denies the same.
`
`2.
`
`Applicant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 2 of the Opposition and, on that basis, denies the same.
`
`

`

`3.
`
`Applicant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 3 of the Opposition and, on that basis, denies the same.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`Applicant admits the allegations of Paragraph 4 of the Opposition.
`
`Applicant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 5 of the Opposition and, on that basis, denies the same.
`
`6.
`
`Applicant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 6 of the Opposition and, on that basis, denies the same.
`
`7.
`
`Applicant admits the allegations of Paragraph 7 of the Opposition to the extent that
`
`Opposer’s Reg. No. 1933410 covers “FIBOX” in standard characters without a claim to any font
`
`or style, but denies that it encompasses the stylization used by Applicant.
`
`8.
`
`Applicant admits the allegations of Paragraph 8 of the Opposition to the extent that
`
`the letters “TIBOX” and “FIBOX” differ by one letter, but deny any implication that there is a
`
`likelihood of confusion.
`
`9.
`
`10.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 9 of the Opposition.
`
`Applicant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 10 of the Opposition and, on that basis, denies the same.
`
`11.
`
`Applicant denies the allegations of Paragraph 11 of the Opposition.
`
`AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
`
`Applicant undertakes the burden of proof only as to those defenses deemed affirmative
`
`defenses by law, regardless of how such defenses are denominated below. Applicant expressly
`
`reserves the right to plead additional affirmative and other defenses should such defenses be
`
`revealed by discovery in this case. As and for its affirmative and other defenses, Applicant states
`
`as follows:
`
`

`

`First Affirmative Defense
`
`1.
`
`There is no likelihood of confusion, mistake, or deception between Opposer’s use of
`
`Opposer’s Fibox Marks on Opposer’s Goods and Applicant’s use of Applicant’s Mark on
`
`Applicant’s Goods because, inter alia, Applicant’s Mark is not similar to Opposer’s Fibox Marks.
`
`Specifically, the design, visual appearance, sound, and overall commercial impression are not
`
`similar.
`
`RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
`
`Applicant reserves the right to amend this Answer by way of adding additional defenses,
`
`counterclaims, and third-party claims as the existence of such claims is discovered in the future.
`
`WHEREFORE, Applicant prays that the Opposition be denied with prejudice, in its entirety.
`
`WHEREFORE, Applicant requests such other or additional relief the Board may deem
`
`appropriate.
`
`Dated: February 6, 2024
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`BAYRAMOGLU LAW OFFICES LLC
`By: /s/ David Silver
`DAVID SILVER, ESQ.
`1540 West Warm Springs Road Suite 100
`Henderson, Nevada 89014
`Attorneys for Applicant
`
`

`

`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I, David Silver, hereby certify that a true correct copy of the foregoing ANSWER AND
`
`AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES OF APPLICANT was served upon Opposer by email on this
`
`day of February 6, 2024 at the following address:
`
`
`MICHELLE J. LEVIN
`LEASON ELLIS LLP
`ONE BARKER AVE., FIFTH FLOOR
`WHITE PLAINS, NY 10601
`levin@leasonellis.com, lelitdocketing@leasonellis.com
`
`
`
`By:
`
`/s/ David Silver
`DAVID SILVER, ESQ.
`
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket