estta tracking number: estta1115444 02/18/2021
TRANSCRIPT
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
ESTTA Tracking number: ESTTA1115444
Filing date: 02/18/2021
IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Proceeding 91251090
Party DefendantCarl Raymond Amos
CorrespondenceAddress
CARL AMOS8710 W HILLSBOROUGH AVE, SUITE 413TAMPA, FL 33615UNITED STATESPrimary Email: [email protected]
Submission Other Motions/Submissions
Filer's Name Carl Raymond Amos
Filer's email [email protected]
Signature /Carl R. Amos/
Date 02/18/2021
Attachments Motion for Change of Venue Federal Court for Eastern District of Virg iniaII.pdf(2627829 bytes )
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE:
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
P.O. Box 1451 Alexandria, VA 22313-1451 General Contact Number: 571-272-8500
General Email: [email protected]
Carl Raymond Amos (Carl R. Amos)
Applicant
vs. Opposition no. 91251090
TransAmerica,
Aegon Netherlands et.al.
Opposer
Amended Motion for Change of Venue
February 18, 2021 update: Applicant received erratic call from Opposer Bruce McDonald, counsel
TransAmerica, Aegon Netherlands et.al. and Opposer has agreed to Litigate in US Federal Court
for the Eastern District of Virginia Rocket Docket.
Also Opposer further threatened Motions. However, he is not afraid to litigate case in US Federal
Court.
The Applicant requests a change of venue to move from the TTAB to United States Federal Circuit
Court before the Eastern District of Alexandria, Virginia. Further, the Applicant Amos requests the
move due to the Adjudicated and Denied Opposition case No. 91251090.
Reasons for Transfer are:
� Lack of Proper Venue.
� Registered Architectural Works Copyrights Patents are prohibited defenses.
� Not in TTAB pervue: and beyond its statute and scope and authority.
� Grande Fishing Expeditions are generally not tolerated in Rocket Docket.
� Doctrine of unclean hands.
� Opposer’s actions are reckless mysterious and suspicious.
� True Benefactors of Opposer’s actions are Qatar State Bank et.al and Great Britain (UK).
� Amos is owner of Registered Architectural Works Copyrights for London Shard, Exhibit A,
awarded by USA Copyright Office to Amos and issued patents currently in force.
� Amos famous ‘Mark’ is sho
Carl Amos Exhibit of Glass
www.ncsa.illinois.edu/Peop
� Amos’ non-monetary silver
the Opposer’s class is 042.
� London Shard verbatim cop
without Amos’ knowledge o
� Amos has losses exceed 6
Kingdom.
� The proper venue for Regis
and in force Patents, is in F
� December 22, 2020 Oppos
Before Wellington, Shaw, a
Before Wellington, Shaw, and Leb
We find a genuine dispute of
purposes of likelihood of co
does not argue how its goo
coins or point to evidence f
failure to function claim, a g
which Applicant is currently u
Applicant’s “expressed inten
designate his ownership of th
on the summary judgment re
remains with respect to App
conclude that, based on suc
the mark as a source-identifi
Accordingly, Opposer’s mot
likelihood of confusion, dilutio
hown in the Dec 6, 1999, National Science Found
ss Building, Exhibit B,
ople/tcoffin/ACCESS/Amos/Amos09.html.
er and gold precious metal coin trademark is Clas
42.
copyright infringement, theft & patent infringement
or permission from 2009-2012 in London, Britain
6 billion USD that benefits the Qatar State Bank
gistered Architectural Works Copyrights and its re
Federal Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
osition No.91251090 Transamerica Corporation v
and Lebow.
ebow, Administrative Trademark Judges. By the B
of material fact remains as to the similarity of the
confusion and dilution. Additionally, we note tha
oods or services are related to Applicant’s non
e for purposes of demonstrating a relationship.
genuine dispute remains as to the extent and
ly using his mark on the goods. In its brief, Oppos
tent is to use the claimed mark not as a tradem
f the architectural design of the London Shard.”22
record before us, we find a genuine dispute of m
pplicant’s intent in using his mark. Moreover, w
uch use identified by Opposer, consumers will no
tifier for the identified goods, including non-mone
otion for summary judgment on its claims of p
tion, and failure to function is denied.
Respectfully
by_________
Date_____02
ndation exhibit as
lass 014 whereas
ent structure built
n, UK.
nk & United
related Trademark
ia.
n vs. Carl Amos.
e Board:
the marks for
hat Opposer
on-monetary
ip. As to the
d manner in
poser argues
emark but to
”22However,
material fact
r, we cannot
not perceive
netary coins.
f priority and
lly submitted,
________________
Carl R. Amos
02/18/2021_______
The undersigned counsel certifies that on the 18th
day of February 2021, he caused one copy
each of the foregoing Motion for Change of Venue Update including exhibits in support to be
served by electronic mail, facsimile, and/or overnight mail on the following:
Exhibit A
Exhibit B