The Applicant had filed an application for an extension of time to file its Evidence in Answer. The substantive matter concerned an application (an IRDA) by USA Nutraceuticals Group Inc. for extension of protection to Australia for the trade mark BEAST, and opposition to the extension of protection by Monster Energy Company.
In this decision, the Office refused to grant the extension of time to the Applicant because it failed to show that it had acted promptly and diligently at all times during the relevant period to justify the granting of the extension.
While the Hearing Officer acknowledged that the Holder was a small business with limited staff, had ongoing litigation and business travel during the evidentiary period, while these facts perhaps contributed to the delay in finalising the evidence, she was not satisfied that these facts could excuse the Holder for not meeting the deadline to file its evidence. The Hearing Officer was not satisfied that the Holder had acted promptly and diligently at all times.
Furthermore, the Hearing Officer was not satisfied that exceptional circumstances existed which would justify the granting of the extension request.
The request for an extension of time was refused by the Office.
To view the Office decision, click here.