Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: On Double-cream. New movement on the petition to cancel. READ!

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    474
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 0/0
    Given: 0/0

    On Double-cream. New movement on the petition to cancel. READ!

    Everyone known about the trademark that Dimarzio holds on the double-cream humbuckers.

    Many people know that Sheptone was sued last year.

    Some people know that there is currently a cancellation proceeding filed last year by someone local to me. I hope this link works: USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 92064181

    If not, try here: USPTO TTABVUE. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Inquiry System

    The person who filed this petition has spent $10,000 to date on attorney fees.

    The USPTO has issued a statement that basically says "We want evidence that more people in the community are affected" (Page 5 in the document listed above)

    THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO SPEAK UP AND BE HEARD.

    A document has been prepared by the attorney representing the cancellation proceeding. This document will be collected by the attorney and forwarded to the USPTO as evidence that people in the community are affected, and that it limits the choice of manufacturers.

    This document is here:

    http://www.echoesofmars.com/Declarat...03277903-2.doc Please sign it, and write a short statement on page two explaining that you would like the choice to purchase your favorite brand of pickups in the color you desire so you can make your guitar fit your preferred aesthetics/colors/appearance, etc.

    Winders should express that they are a manufacturer who is affected due to LOST SALES.



    Print the document, sign it, scan it, (or photograph well) and then email it to:

    iwantdoublecream@gmail.com

    THE DEADLINE IS MARCH 13TH.


    This is your chance. If enough signatures and statements are not collected, the USPTO will terminate this cancellation proceeding.






    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  2. #2
    Senior Member Daver's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    408
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 0/0
    Given: 0/0
    Done!

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  3. #3
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Planet Mongo in the country of PAF
    Posts
    3,954
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 0/0
    Given: 0/0

    Did this go anywhere?

    Curious if this went anywhere.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    http://www.SDpickups.com
    Stephens Design Pickups

  4. #4
    Supporting Member mozz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    NEPA
    Posts
    512
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 6/0
    Given: 4/0
    I got a email last week about a refund due to it being canceled. Few days later my donation was returned to my account. So i guess it was dropped.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  5. #5
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Just south of Bawlmer, Merlin
    Posts
    2,300
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 17/1
    Given: 19/0
    However, this does not amount to the allegations of affidavits or signatures on petitions, or survey results that show, as required by Ritchie, that other guitar owners share his belief in damage if Respondent's mark remains registered.
    Just wondering- I take it that opinions expressed on various guitar gear discussion forums have no legal weight?
    In other words, only affidavits, petitions, or surveys are considered?
    It appears that the bar is only "belief" in damage - not proof of damage.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  6. #6
    Old Timer J M Fahey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Buenos Aires, Argentina
    Posts
    10,046
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 57/0
    Given: 59/2
    Of course Forum opinions have zero legal weight.
    Main problem is that users are anonymous, period.
    Even in the very few cases (such as mine) where a user posts full real name, itīs not checked , so .....
    Besides that, "whatīs not filed in Court records does not exist" , so unless somebody specifically delivers them using the proper channels, they are irrelevant.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Juan Manuel Fahey

  7. #7
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Just south of Bawlmer, Merlin
    Posts
    2,300
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 17/1
    Given: 19/0

    Just wondering

    This proceeding is still live, no?

    Prosecution History
    USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 92064181

    MOT Denied; Trial Dates Reset
    http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?p...pty=CAN&eno=21
    The proceeding is RESUMED. The remaining conferencing, discovery, disclosure,and trial dates are reset as follows:

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Those Who Hear Not the Music Think the Dancers Mad
    - Anon (multiple citations predate Friedrich Nietzsche)

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    474
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 0/0
    Given: 0/0
    Quote Originally Posted by rjb View Post
    This proceeding is still live, no?

    Prosecution History
    USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 92064181

    MOT Denied; Trial Dates Reset
    USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 92064181
    The proceeding is RESUMED. The remaining conferencing, discovery, disclosure,and trial dates are reset as follows:
    Yes.

    And if the pending cream/blade application is defeated, it's even more weight in support of the cancellation of the original cream mark.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    474
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 0/0
    Given: 0/0
    Quote Originally Posted by rjb View Post
    This proceeding is still live, no?

    Prosecution History
    USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 92064181

    MOT Denied; Trial Dates Reset
    USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 92064181
    The proceeding is RESUMED. The remaining conferencing, discovery, disclosure,and trial dates are reset as follows:
    Yes.

    And if the pending cream/blade application is defeated, it's even more weight in support of the cancellation of the original cream mark.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  10. #10
    Old Timer RedHouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Pacific NW - USA
    Posts
    1,777
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 0/0
    Given: 0/0
    I Haven't been around here in a long time but just poked my nose through the door to see what's happening and saw this thread.

    Last post was in December so I'm wondering if this is still "in play" (the USPTO preceeding) and if it's not too late to submit a doc statement?

    -Brad

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. DiMarzio's Double-Cream Trademark?
    By Tonestack in forum Pickup Makers
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 04-03-2013, 08:02 PM
  2. Looking for dimarzio double-cream trademark #
    By belwar in forum Pickup Makers
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 12-24-2008, 02:13 AM
  3. anymore trademarks besides double cream?
    By kevinT in forum Pickup Makers
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-26-2007, 02:30 PM
  4. double Cream 59 paf
    By NightWinder in forum Pickup Makers
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 04-04-2007, 12:23 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-15-2007, 06:48 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •