ESTTA Tracking number: ESTTA1482377
`Filing date: 12/10/2025
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Proceeding no.
`
`92089483
`
`Party
`
`Defendant
`Ninety Plus LLC
`
`Correspondence JESSICA EAVES MATHEWS
`address LEVERAGE LEGAL GROUP LLC
`1700 WESTLAKE AVE N, SUITE 200
`SEATTLE, WA 98109
`UNITED STATES
`Primary email: jessica@leveragelegalgroup.com
`888-505-5838
`Submission Answer
`Filer's name Jessica Eaves Mathews
`Filer's email jessica@leveragelegalgroup.com, info@niksallie.com
`Signature /Jessica Eaves Mathews/
`Date 12/10/2025
`Attachments ANSWER TO PETITION FOR CANCELLATION - Cancellation No
`
`92089483.pdf(119174 bytes )
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`90+ OT, LLC.,
`Cancellation No. 92089483
`Petitioner
`In re Registration No. 5,586,370
`V.
`ANSWER TO PETITION FOR
`Ninety Plus LLC, CANCELLATION
`Respondent
`
`Mark: NINETY +
`
`Date registered: October 16, 2018
`Section 8 Renewal: April 17, 2025
`
`Respondent, Ninety Plus LLC (“Respondent™), by and through its representative,
`hereby answers the Petition for Cancellation filed by 90+ OT, LLC (“Petitioner”)
`
`as follows:
`
`RESPONSE TO BACKGROUND ALLEGATIONS
`
`1. Respondent ADMITS the allegations contained in Paragraph 1.
`2. Respondent ADMITS the allegations contained in Paragraph 2, including the
`filing of Application Serial No. 87/936,921 on May 25, 2018, the services
`
`recited therein, and the assertion of first use in commerce since at least as
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`early as December 31, 2013.
`
`3. Respondent ADMITS that USPTO records reflect the procedural history of
`Petitioner’s Application Serial No. 98/769151 and its claimed first use date
`of December 20, 2020.
`
`4. Respondent ADMITS that USPTO records reflect the procedural history of
`Petitioner’s Application, including the refusal under Section 2(d) and
`
`subsequent revival, and Respondent DENIES that the refusal was in error.
`
`RESPONSE TO COUNT ONE — CANCELLATION BASED ON
`ABANDONMENT
`
`5. Respondent repeats and realleges its responses to the prior paragraphs as
`though fully set forth herein.
`
`6. Respondent DENIES the allegations contained in Paragraph 6. Respondent
`has continuously used the NINETY + mark in interstate commerce since
`2013 through regular annual clinics, social media promotion, youth training
`camps, and community programming. Respondent’s most recent clinics
`occurred in 2023, and Respondent has planned, organized, and begun
`preparing for new clinics scheduled for 2025-2026. Respondent has never
`formed any intent to abandon the mark and has maintained a bona fide intent
`to continue offering services under the NINETY + mark at all relevant
`
`times.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7. Respondent DENIES the allegations contained in Paragraph 7. Any
`temporary interruptions in in-person clinics in 2019-2020 and 20242025
`were due to special circumstances fully consistent with continued trademark
`use. These circumstances include (a) in 2019, the primary facility
`Respondent used for winter camp got destroyed via tornado, (b) in 2020, in-
`person events were prohibited due to the COVID-19 shutdown, (c) the
`founder’s professional soccer commitments, including international play and
`training obligations affected his availability for clinic scheduling and
`appearances, (c) the founder’s personal circumstances, including the birth of
`his first child and the purchase of a home, and (d) the unexpected
`cancellation by a local Ohio club partner that had committed to provide
`facilities, marketing, and participants for Respondent’s 2024 clinic.
`Respondent fully intended to hold the 2024 clinic and was ready to do so
`until the partner failed to perform. Respondent then began reevaluating and
`restructuring its operating model to ensure the continued success of future
`events. Throughout these periods Respondent maintained an uninterrupted
`bona fide intent to resume and continue offering clinics under the NINETY
`+ mark.
`
`8. Respondent DENIES the allegations contained in Paragraph 8.
`
`RESPONSE TO COUNT TWO — CANCELLATION BASED ON NONUSE AT
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FILING
`
`9. Respondent repeats and realleges its responses to the prior paragraphs as
`though fully set forth herein.
`
`10.Respondent DENIES the allegations contained in Paragraph 10.
`
`11.Respondent DENIES the allegations contained in Paragraph 11. Respondent
`was using the NINETY + mark in commerce as of the May 25, 2018, filing
`date. Respondent’s use included, but was not limited to, (a) December 2017
`social media promotions of NINETY + winter clinics, (b) a March 9, 2018
`promotion of Respondent’s Spring Clinic, (c) Respondent’s 2018 Spring
`Clinic evidenced by customer invoices, waivers, internal organizing emails,
`and marketing materials bearing the mark, and (d) a May 2018
`announcement of Respondent’s upcoming Chicago event partnership. These
`activities constitute bona fide use in commerce prior to and on the filing
`date.
`
`12.Respondent DENIES the allegations contained in Paragraph 12. Respondent
`had made bona fide use of the NINETY + mark in interstate commerce on or
`before May 25, 2018, and the Registration is not void ab initio.
`
`13.Respondent DENIES the allegations contained in Paragraph 13.
`
`RESPONSE TO STANDING
`
`14.Respondent DENIES the allegations contained in Paragraph 14 except
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respondent ADMIT that Petitioner’s Application was refused based on
`Respondent’s Registration. Respondent DENIES that Petitioner is or is
`likely to be damaged by the continued existence of Respondent’s valid and
`continuously used Registration.
`
`15.Respondent DENIES the allegations contained in Paragraph 15.
`
`16.Respondent DENIES the allegations contained in Paragraph 16. The
`NINETY + mark is not a “dead mark,” and Respondent’s continued use and
`registration serve the public interest by accurately reflecting prior,
`
`continuous rights.
`
`AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
`
`FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE — PRIOR AND CONTINUOUS USE
`Respondent is the prior and continuous user of the trademark NINETY + in
`connection with sports training services and soccer training services. Respondent
`has used the mark in interstate commerce since at least December 2013, predating
`
`Petitioner’s claimed first use of December 20, 2020.
`
`SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE — NO ABANDONMENT;
`EXCUSABLE NONUSE
`
`Respondent has not ceased use of the mark and at all times has maintained an
`intent to resume use. To the extent any temporary interruptions in in-person clinics
`
`constitute periods of nonuse, such nonuse was excused based on special
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`circumstances, including the COVID-19 shutdown, professional soccer
`commitments, personal life circumstances of the founder, and the unexpected
`cancellation of Respondent’s 2024 event partner who had contractually committed
`to provide facilities, marketing, and participants. Respondent has continued to use
`the mark in promotions, planning, and brand development and is actively
`
`organizing upcoming clinics.
`
`THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE — FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM
`
`The Petition fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Petition
`does not allege any facts supporting its conclusions of abandonment or nonuse at
`the time of filing. It does not allege (a) any factual basis showing nonuse in the
`three-year statutory presumption period, (b) any facts showing an intent to
`abandon, (c) any facts challenging Respondent’s specimen or demonstrating
`nonuse as of May 25, 2018, or (d) any specific conduct by Respondent supporting
`either statutory ground for cancellation. The Petition consists of conclusory
`statements reciting statutory elements without alleging supporting factual matter
`
`and therefore fails to state a claim for relief.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Respondent, Ninety Plus LLC, respectfully requests that:
`
`1. The Petition for Cancellation be DISMISSED with prejudice.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2. U.S. Trademark Registration No. 5,586,370 for the mark NINETY + remain
`on the Principal Register.
`3. Respondent be granted such other and further relief as the Trademark Trial
`
`and Appeal Board may deem just and proper.
`
`Dated: December 10, 2025
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /s/ Jessica Eaves Mathews
`
`Jessica Eaves Mathews, Esq.
`LEVERAGE LEGAL GROUP LLC
`1700 Westlake Ave N, Suite 200
`Seattle, WA 98109
`
`Phone: 888-505-5838
`
`jessica@leveragelegaleroup.com
`
`/s/ Nik Sallie
`
`Nicole RaShun Sallie, Esq.
`TASTEMAKERS LEGAL, PLLC
`P.O. Box 171318
`
`Austin, Texas 78717
`
`Phone: (512) 537-8562
`
`info@niksallie.com
`
`Attorneys for Respondents
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a true and complete copy of the foregoing ANSWER TO
`PETITION FOR CANCELLATION has been served on counsel for Petitioner by
`
`email on this 10th day of December 2025, at the following address:
`
`ZAHRA ASADI
`
`NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP
`
`301 S. COLLEGE STREET, SUITE 2300
`
`CHARLOTTE, NC 28202
`
`zahra.asadi@nelsonmullins.com, christine.plaisted@nelsonmullins.com,
`ipdocket@nelsonmullins.com, nichole.hayden@nelsonmullins.com
`
`By: /s/ Jessica Eaves Mathews
`Jessica Eaves Mathews, Esq.
`LEVERAGE LEGAL GROUP LLC
`1700 Westlake Ave N, Suite 200
`Seattle, WA 98109
`jessica@leveragelegalgroup.com
`
`Attorney for Respondent
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`