Araujo v. Framboise Holdings Inc
Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky
A recent decision from the Federal Circuit highlights how the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) handles requests for more time and the kind of evidence needed to prove who used a trademark first. The case involved two companies, both seeking to register the hashtag mark #TODECACHO for hair-related products. Jalmar Araujo applied to register the mark for hair combs, but Framboise Holdings Inc. opposed the registration, claiming it had already been using a similar design mark for a range of hair products since 2017.
One key issue was whether the TTAB was right to grant Framboise a short extension of its trial period, allowing it to submit a crucial declaration from its director a few days late. The court found that the Board acted within its discretion, noting that Framboise had not shown negligence or bad faith, it was their first extension request, and most of their evidence was already submitted on time. The Board’s willingness to grant short extensions when there’s good cause—especially if it’s the first request and there’s no sign of abuse—was reaffirmed.
The second major question was whether Framboise had proven it used the #TODECACHO mark before Araujo. The Board relied on a declaration from Framboise’s director, which detailed the products, the date of first use, and included examples of the mark on products in U.S. stores. Even though this was the testimony of a single interested witness, the court said it was clear, convincing, and unchallenged—especially since Araujo chose not to cross-examine the witness or present contrary evidence. As a result, the Board’s finding that Framboise had priority was supported by substantial evidence.
This decision serves as a reminder that timely, detailed, and uncontested evidence—even from a single witness—can be enough to establish trademark priority. It also shows that the TTAB is generally flexible with procedural deadlines, as long as parties act in good faith and don’t abuse the process.