(@cheryl.butler)

Additional Discussion of TTAB's Standard Protective Order

Comment on TTAB's Standard Protective Order: Dinu (Jan 2019)

Idea: Standard Protective Order Comment: I represent my corporation in the role of inventor/Owner and have experienced the headache created by in-house and outside council distinction in the language. I agree with the revision or better required signatures on SEO by the parties that will then establish the contract obligation between parties to settle their dispute, which otherwise is non existent and at the hand of ...more »

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@cheryl.butler)

Additional Discussion of TTAB's Standard Protective Order

Comments on TTAB's standard protective order: Jahn (Jan 2019)

Please provide your answers and comments to the following questions. 1. Please describe the entity or individual submitting the comments (i.e., a law firm, a private practice attorney, a corporation or other business entity, in-house counsel, a trade association, a legal or policy association, professor/academia, other). Kirstin Jahn - Solo practitioner 2. The SPO currently provides for the protection ...more »

Voting

1 vote
1 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@cheryl.butler)

Additional Discussion of TTAB's Standard Protective Order

AIPLA Comments on TTAB's Standard Protective Order

January 2, 2018 The Honorable Gerald F. Rogers Chief Administrative Trademark Judge United States Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board P.O. Box 1451 Alexandria, VA 22313–1451 Via email: gerard.rogers@uspto.gov Re: AIPLA Comments to the current TTAB Standard Protective Order, effective June 24, 2016 Dear Judge Rogers, The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) is pleased to ...more »

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@ipo1972)

Additional Discussion of TTAB's Standard Protective Order

Standard Protective Order

31 January 2018 Honorable Mary Boney Denison U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeals Board Commission of Trademarks 600 Dulany Street Alexandria, VA 22314 Re: Comments on Revising TTAB’s Standard Protective Order Commissioner Denison: The TTAB Policy Collaboration Site has issued a request for comments relating to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s Standard Protective Order (“SPO”) in effect ...more »

Voting

-1 votes
0 up votes
1 down votes
Active
(@lisaulrich)

Additional Discussion of TTAB's Standard Protective Order

IBM and Gilead support the current Standard Protective Order.

Gilead and IBM thank the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“Office”) for the opportunity to comment on the TTAB Standard Protective Order (“SPO”). We appreciate that the current SPO includes a designation for “Attorney’s Eyes Only” that excludes in-house counsel. We think that the outside counsel only designation is especially important in trademark proceedings. Gilead and IBM believe that “Attorney’s Eyes ...more »

Voting

1 vote
1 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@cheryl.butler)

Additional Discussion of TTAB's Standard Protective Order

IPO: Additional Discussion of TTAB's Standard Protective Order

28 March 2019 The Honorable Gerard F. Rogers Chief Administrative Trademark Judge United States Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board P.O. Box 1451 Alexandria, VA 22313–1451 VIA EMAIL ONLY (cheryl.butler@uspto.gov) Re: Additional Discussion of TTAB's Standard Protective Order Dear Chief Judge Rogers: Intellectual Property Owners Association ("IPO") appreciates the opportunity to provide comments ...more »

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@cheryl.butler)

Additional Discussion of TTAB's Standard Protective Order

AIPLA: Additional Discussion of TTAB's Standard Protective Order

March 29, 2019 United States Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board P.O. Box 1451 Alexandria, VA 22313–1451 ATTN: Jennifer Cook Re: Comments of the AIPLA to the current Standard Protective Order Dear Ms. Cook, The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) is pleased to have this opportunity to provide comments on the current version of the USPTO's Standard Protective Order for use ...more »

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@lisaulrich)

Additional Discussion of TTAB's Standard Protective Order

Additional IBM Comments on TTAB's Standard Protective Order

IBM thanks the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("Office") for the opportunity to comment on the additional discussion of TTAB's Standard Protective Order ("SPO"). We have provided our answers and comments to the posted questions below. 1. Please describe the entity or individual submitting the comments (i.e., a law firm, a private practice attorney, a corporation or other business entity, in-house ...more »

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active