This is all very BOLD of the USPTO what is wrong with them America?

From: Pressey, Montia Givens [mailto:intentionallyleftout@USPTO.GOV]

Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 9:28 AM
To: JASON GAMBERT
Subject: RE: 77171330 Second Email

Hi, I have not forgotten. I have been out of the office some and am still catching up. As we discussed, I will ask the interloc or someone else at the Board to take a look at this. Unfortunately, as I advised you, your petition to the director was untimely and no request for reconsideration of that denial of your petition was timely filed. Therefore, I will ask someone at the Board to take a look at this on an informal basis.

From: JASON GAMBERT
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 4:57 AM
To: Pressey, Montia Givens
Subject: 77171330 Second Email

Hi,

We spoke two weeks ago, and I wanted to follow up for any updates in regards to this major issue at hand. To ask your department what is being done? Even the petition ruling will get light exposed on it for being a ruling that is not correct by the evidenced timeliness of the applicant. This supports just another example of USPTO’s gross negligence and malicious conduct. A diabolical and evasive tactic from issuance is what is appears to be. Issue my trademark please and stop delaying the inevitable. It is clear as crystal the issuing department was going to print and send the trademark (I own by law) to me. Charles Joiner called me asking me where he should send it.  I told him of the issue with 91183740 Rhea Drysdale and what happened. I chose being honest rather than remaining silent and having the trademark already in my possession right now. I did not do that, I did what is right. I told Charles the truth of the issue I have with Rhea Drysdale. He checked with the TTAB and they illegally “Barred” him from sending anything. What does that appear to be? Then the Linehan filing, to “Receive no further consideration.” This is all very bold of the USPTO.

I did my research and have now found this case just keeps getting worse for you and your agency if you don’t do what is right. This matter is not going away I assure you, there are ways to escalate this to full investigations from the department of justice (just one) and I would like to give you this 2^nd notice of my civil attempts at having my property issued to me rightfully by law. I have not heard back from you or your department.  Please reply I would like a response please from you or your department. The TTAB does not have the authority to stop the issuing department from issuing the trademark to me by law, teach them.

They need to fix the problem they created and do what is right, what is just, and what is fair by their own laws. These laws govern the offices of their employment (Scope) respectfully, they must follow what is written for them by law. If you are a licensed attorney it is also your duty to enforce any major issues like this you are aware of to the appropriate departments. I hope that this gets resolved swiftly, efficiently, because justice is very real and will be carried out all the way to the fullest extent of the capabilities and what is given by law to find resolve when the government or it’s agencies go against everything this nation was built upon. Yes it is that big and extreme the mistakes this agency has made clearly. We all must follow the laws of this land, no one is above the law, no administration, no agency, and especially no judges who are operating outside of their immunities, their scope of office they become mere men.

If that were the issue, which it is not, the issue is issuing, issue my property I own by law please. Stop delaying. I hope this doesn’t come off the wrong way, but injustice will not be tolerated. I am just getting going on all this, I haven’t made any huge publicity or any large legal moves yet. I am trying in a good faith effort to be civil and find easy resolution for all of us. I want to hear back from you or your department before this gets much, much worse.  They dragged you into all this, now it is your duty and you have all the support by law you need. Stand for what is right, your “Scope” also has strength. Do what is right, side with the truth and the law all of you.  All of you who are reading this I encourage you to evaluate this case I am building and one another about what is right, what is just, what the truth is in this matter and most importantly what the law says.

That is what everyone must do.

Follow the law issue my trademark and stop withholding my property please.

Sincerely,

Jason Gambert

From: JASON GAMBERT
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 8:48 AM
To: ‘intentionallyleftout@uspto.gov’
Subject: 77171330

Hi Montia,

I think this all should clearly be enough evidence in support of striking a late filing (Nullity) from record. I have supplied just some of the evidence I have. I appreciate you, Jennifer, Charles, and Tyrone very much. I want to extend my gratitude for your time, and your invaluable consideration on this major issue at hand. I look forward to our next conversation in the near future. Thanks again.

91183740 Rhea Drysdale (Not Even Registered as an Opposition by Estta here)

http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?qt=adv&procstatus=All&pno=77171330&propno=&qs=&propnameop=&propname=&pop=&pn=&pop2=&pn2=&cop=&cn=

SEO TM Publication Date:

Mar 25, 2008 12:00 AM

Thirtieth day and last day would be 4/23/08 up to 11:59 pm

I respectfully request a different interlocutory attorney due to conflict of interest in regards to my cases.

I do not need Anne Linehans leave to file when there is extraordinary circumstances.

She doesn’t return calls, and has proven nothing less than negligence by allowing a late case to move forward against federal statutes.

This 91183740 case is a major nullity issue, as if the case never existed, outside the time permitted by law. Must be stricken from the record, nullity issues don’t have timeline limitations. This may be the avenue I may be forced to take respectfully, unless someone by the grace of God can be civil in regards to all this.

ATTACHED ABOVE

“Reinstatment due to office error 77171330” Exhibit 11 shows evidence of an ESTTA time stamp  proving the late opposition 91183740 outside the time permitted by federal statute and uspto laws.

Evidence of Tyrone Cambell explaining the time ended on the 24^th “ttabvue-77171330-EXT-14”

“Thus, the time for filing an opposition or request for extension

of time expired April 24, 2008”

Anyone who is employed by this agency works within the “Scope of their employment” (Judges) if they rule outside of the statutes and rules that govern their tribunals then they are acting outside their scope of employment and become mere men, and should be aware of the major issue at hand, hopefully do what is right, just and fair please. Judicial immunity should be kept clean.

I followed the rules, and likewise I just pray they can follow the rules too.

I am very invested coming up on 5 years pursing this when according to the law, I already own it, but it is being withheld from my possession from legal defects. Keeping my property without just compensation is a major issue.

“The notice of abandonment I received, trademark law goes of the “Date of Mailing September 22, 2010.” I have 60 days from this point.

As you can see the trail  below, never was I untimely according to the law. § 2.66  Revival of abandoned applications. (1)

Thank you kindly again for your time.

Again, you have my deepest respect and gratitude for your invaluable time thanks…

RULES OF PRACTICE IN TRADEMARK CASES

: Examination of Application and Action by Applicants

2.66 – Revival of abandoned applications.

(a) The applicant may file a petition to revive an application abandoned because the applicant did not timely respond to an Office action or notice of allowance, if the delay was unintentional. The applicant must file the petition:

(1) Within two months of the date of issuance of the notice of abandonment;

II.I.JI.WHAT.II.I.JI.

II.I.JI.

JI.

I.

.