110.03 Service of ESTTA Filings
Except for the notice of opposition, the petition to cancel, or notice of a concurrent use proceeding, every submission filed in a Board inter partes proceeding must be served upon the other parties to the proceeding, and proof of service must be provided before the paper will be considered. [ Note 1.] For all other submissions filed in ESTTA, the filer must include a certificate of service as an attachment (or as part of an attachment) to the ESTTA filing as proof of service. Many of the ESTTA forms, e.g., "consent motion forms," assist the filer by including a certificate of service as part of the ESTTA submission.
In addition to the requirement for a certificate of service, all submissions must actually be served upon the other parties to the proceeding by email, unless otherwise stipulated. [ Note 2.] See TBMP § 113 (Service of Papers).
The Board effects service of the notice of opposition or petition to cancel or notice of concurrent use proceeding by providing, in the notice of institution, a web link or web address to access the electronic proceeding record. [ Note 3.] For other filings, ESTTA does not automatically serve papers upon opposing parties or provide notice of their filing [ Note 4.]
For a further discussion regarding the filing of a notice of opposition or a petition for cancellation using ESTTA, and notification, see TBMP § 306.01 (notice of opposition); and TBMP § 307.01-TBMP § 307.02 (petition for cancellation).
NOTES:
1. 37 C.F.R. § 2.119(a); 37 C.F.R. §2.105(a); 37 C.F.R. §2.113(a).
2. See, e.g., Springfield Inc. v. XD, 86 USPQ2d 1063, 1064 (TTAB 2008) ("The proof of service requirement assumes actual service on applicant, or its attorney or domestic representative of record, if any."). See also 37 C.F.R. § 2.119(b).
3. 37 C.F.R. § 2.99(d)(1); 37 C.F.R. § 2.105(a); 37 C.F.R. § 2.113(a).
4. See, e,g., Equine Touch Foundation Inc. v. Equinology Inc., 91 USPQ2d 1943, 1944 n.5 (TTAB 2009) ("Actual forwarding of the service copy, however, is the responsibility of the filer, as ESTTA does not effect service for the filer."); Schott AG v. Scott, 88 USPQ2d 1862, 1863 n.3 (TTAB 2008) (same).