Shammas v. Focarino
District Court, E.D. Virginia
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
T.S. ELLIS, III, District Judge.
At issue post-judgment in this 15 U.S.C. § 1071(b) action seeking review of a decision from the Patent and Trademark Office’s (“PTO”) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) are the following two questions:(1) whether the requirement in 15 U.S.C. § 1071(b)(3) that plaintiff must pay the PTO “all expenses of the proceeding” includes the salaries of the PTO attorneys and paralegals who worked on the case; and(2) whether the PTO’s claim for $11,436.15 for the effort expended by the PTO’s counsel in moving to strike supplemental new evidence…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Blum v. StensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Fox v. ViceSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Robinson v. Equifax Information Services, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2009
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Route Triple Seven Ltd. Partnership v. Total Hockey, Inc.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2015
- Milo Shammas v. Margaret FocarinoCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2015
- Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P. v. Lessard Design, Inc.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2015
- Shammas v. LeeDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2016
- Realvirt, LLC v. LeeDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2016
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.