Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> The TTABlog

Intellectual Property Law

: The TTABlog

Precedential No. 16: Fraud Claim Survives Motion to Dismiss; Facts Pleaded with Sufficient Particularity

Petitioner Löwenbräu's fraud claim alleged that, according to its investigation, Respondent White Gold, at the time of filing its Statements of Use, was using its marks only on vodka and not on on all the goods listed in the Statement. Furthermore, Löwenbräu further alleged that Respondent (but not than any particular individual) had the requisite intent to deceive the USPTO. The Board found those allegations to be sufficiently specific and particular to satisfy FRCP 9(b), and it denied Respondent's motion to dismiss. Meckatzer Löwenbräu Benedikt Weiß KG v. White Gold, LLC, Cancellation No. 92051014 (May 13, 2010) [precedential].Registrant White Gold (a Russian company) received two registrations in 2008 for its mark WHITE GOLD (in standard character and design form) for "aperitifs; orak; brandy; wine; whiskey; gin; vodka; prepared alcoholic cocktails; liqueurs; alcoholic beverages, namely, alcoholic coffee-based beverage; alcoholic tea-based beverage; alcoholic punch; calvados; champagne; cognac; Curacao; herb liqueurs; ouzo; schnapps; tequila; alcoholic beverages containing fruit; distilled spirits; mead; peppermint liqueurs; alcoholic bitters; rum; sake; hard cider; rice alcohol...continue to full post

Full post as published by The TTABlog on May 24, 2010 (boomark / email).