Heartland Recreational Vehicles LLC v. Forest River Inc

Filing 149

MOTION for Protective Order [Motion for Enforcement of Scheduling Order and for Protective Order to Prevent Enforcement of Heartland's Post-Discovery Subpoena to RV Daily Report] by Counter Claimant Forest River Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Certificate under Rule 26(c)(1) and L.R. 37.1, # 2 Exhibit Ex. A - Oct 15 RV Daily Report article and blog, # 3 Exhibit Ex. B - Oct 19 RV Daily Report article and blog, # 4 Exhibit Ex. C - Subpoena, # 5 Exhibit Ex. D - Dec. 10 RV Daily Report article and blog, # 6 Exhibit Ex. E - Dec 13 RV Daily Report article and blog, # 7 Exhibit Ex. F - USPTO Decision, # 8 Exhibit Ex. G - RV Daily Report email, # 9 Exhibit Ex. H - RV Daily Report Notice of Objections)(Fountain, Ryan)

Heartland Recreational Vehicles LLC v. Forest River Inc

Doc. 149 Att. 7

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
OFFICE OF ENROLLMENT AND DISCIPLINE

SEP 2 9 2010
Mr. Robert D. Null Baker & Daniels 300 N. Meridian Street, Suite 2700 Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL Re: FileNo. G1426 Respondent: Ryan M. Fountain Dear Mr. Null: This will serve as notice of a considered review by the Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) of the grievance as initiated by you in your letter dated November 6, 2009. After a thorough and meticulous investigation, it is the determination that this file will be closed and the investigation considered complete as conduct not being disciplinary in nature. n individual who practices before the United States Patent and. Trademark Office .("USPTO" or "Office") may be disciplined, inter alia, for violations of the isciplinary Rules of the USPTO Code of Professional Responsibility. See 7 CFR § 11.19. Under the applicable procedural rules, however, misconduct by the bractitioner must be established by clear and convincing evidence. See 67 CFR § 11.49. The Director of the Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) may bresent the evidence to the Committee on Discipline under 37 CFR § 11.32 which bust find probable cause to bring disciplinary action. An investigation is terminated hnder 37 C.F.R. 11.22 if, after investigation, the OED Director concludes the bomplaint or information is unsubstantiated by evidence sufficient to make a case for probable cause to be presented to the Committee on Discipline. An investigation shall be terminated without taking disciplinary action pursuant to 37 C.F.R. 11.22(h) (1), CERTIFIED MAfL\)0/Dlgr7!)OD[y~ £[?2L/ CfJ) (] ~ RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Mail Stop OED. P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450-vvvvvv.USPTO.GOV

Dockets.Justia.com

Robert D. Null

2

(2), (3), (4) when the information or evidence is unfounded or relates to matters not within the jurisdiction of the Office; or where, as a matter of law, the conduct about which information or evidence has been obtained does not constitute grounds for discipline, even if the conduct may involve a legal dispute; or the available evidence is insufficient to conclude that there is probable cause to believe that grounds exist for discipline. There being insufficient indicia of facts to support a finding of willful conduct that would constitute probable cause that violations of the Patent and Trademark Office Code of Professional Responsibility exist, effective this date, this investigation wib be deemed terminated and the file closed with the grievance not being disciplinary in nature.

l~:~J~..-"'(er:"-ic""'1kV .lStaff Attorney Office of Enrollment and Discipline