High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
2007-1432(Cancellation No. 92/045,050)UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUITNASALOK COATING CORPORATION,Appellant,v.NYLOK CORPORATION,Appellee.Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark Trial andAppeal Board Decision in Cancellation No. 92/045,050, Judges Quinn, Bucher andTaylor. Decided March 28, 2007
NASALOK COATING CORPORATION COMBINED PETITION FORPANEL REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC
Erik M. PeltonChristopher R. ShiplettE
RIK
M.
P
ELTON
&
A
SSOCIATES
,
PLLCPO Box 100637Arlington, VA 22210(703) 525-8009Attorneys for AppellantNasalok Coating CorporationApril 28, 2008
i
CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTNasalok Coating Corporation v. Nylok Corporation, 07-1432
Counsel for Appellant, NASALOK COATING CORPORATION, certifies thefollowing:1.
The full name of every party I represent isNASALOK COATING CORPORATION2.
The name of the real party in interest I represent isNASALOK COATING CORPORATION3.
No parent corporations or any publicly held companies own 10 percent ormore of the stock of NASALOK COATING CORPORATIONNONE4.
The names of all law firms and the partners or associates that appearedfor NASALOK COATING CORPORATION before the Trademark Trialand Appeal Board or are expected to appear in this court are:Erik M. Pelton, Christopher R. Shiplett of Erik M. Pelton & Associates (formerlyErik M. Pelton, Attorney at Law)April 28, 2008_____________________________Erik M. PeltonErik M. Pelton & Associates, PLLC
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF CONTENTS
.......................................................................................ii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
................................................................................iii
STATEMENT OF COUNSEL FOR
EN BANC
PETITION
...............................1
STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND POINTS OF LAWOVERLOOKED
............................................................................................1
ARGUMENT
............................................................................................................2
I. INTRODUCTION
............................................................................................2
II. THE PANEL DECISION CONFLICTS WITH THE TRADEMARKPOLICIES DESCRIBED IN
JET
AND RELATED CASES
..................4
III. THE PANEL MISAPPLIED THE RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THERESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF JUDGMENTS
...................................6
IV. THE PANEL MAJORITY REACHED ITS CONCLUSIONWITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF ADVERSARIAL BRIEFING ONTHE ISSUE.
...............................................................................................13
V. CONCLUSION
..................................................................................................15
ADDENDUM – PANEL OPINIONCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Add a Comment