NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2008-1569

(Opposition No. 91/164,582)

LEO STOLLER CENTRAL MFG. CO.,

Appellant,

v.

JOVAN POCEKOVIC,

Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office,

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

2008-1570

(Opposition Nos. 91/154,585 and 91/154,617)

LEO STOLLER CENTRAL MFG. CO.,

Appellant,

v.

THE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF TRADEMARK ABUSE LLC

(substituted for Leo Stoller Central Mfg. Co.),

Appellee,

and

MEDTRONIC SOFAMOR DANEK, INC.,

Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office,

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
2008-1571

(Opposition No. 91/092,085)

LEO STOLLER,

Appellant,

v.

THE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF TRADEMARK ABUSE LLC

(substituted for Leo Stoller),

Appellee,

and

THE SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE COMPANY,

Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office,

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

2008-1572

(Opposition No. 91/159,950)

LEO STOLLER,

Appellant,

v.

THE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF TRADEMARK ABUSE LLC

(substituted for Central Mfg. Co.),

Appellee,

and

PREMIUM PRODUCTS, INC.,

2008-1569 et al.	2
Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office,

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

2008-1573

(Opposition No. 91/117,894)

LEO STOLLER,

Appellant,

v.

THE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF TRADEMARK ABUSE LLC

(substituted for Leo Stoller d/b/a Central Mfg. Co.),

Appellee,

and

SUTECH U.S.A., INC.,

Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office,

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

2008-1574

(Opposition No. 91/093,601)

LEO STOLLER,

Appellant,

v.

THE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF TRADEMARK ABUSE LLC

(substituted for Leo Stoller),

Appellee,

2008-1569 et al.	3
and

GEORGE C. KASBOSKE,

Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office,

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

2008-1575

(Opposition No. 91/167,658)

LEO STOLLER,

Appellant,

v.

THE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF TRADEMARK ABUSE LLC

(substituted for Central Mfg. Co.),

Appellee,

and

SURGICAL NAVIGATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office,

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

2008-1576

(Opposition No. 91/169,502)

LEO STOLLER CENTRAL MFG. CO.,

Appellant,

v.

THE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF TRADEMARK ABUSE LLC

2008-1569 et al.	4
(substituted for Leo Stoller Central Mfg. Co.),

Appellee,

and

LOVELAND PRODUCTS, INC.,

Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office,

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

ON MOTION

Before MICHEL, Chief Judge, GAJARSA and LINN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

Leo Stoller moves for reconsideration of the court's January 22, 2009 order

dismissing his appeal for failure to comply with the court's January 5, 2009 order.

Stoller also submits a response seeking reconsideration of the January 5 order.

Stoller moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in each of the eight abovecaptioned appeals. The court denied the motions on November 17, 2008, determining

that Stoller had not provided required information concerning his income and assets.

Stoller's motion for reconsideration of the November 17 order was denied on January 5,

2009. In the January 5 order, the court stated that no additional extensions would be

granted and that the appeals would be dismissed if Stoller did not pay the filing fees

within 14 days.

Stoller did not pay the filing fees within 14 days and thus the clerk dismissed the

appeals on January 22, 2009. Stoller now seeks reconsideration of the clerk's dismissal

2008-1569 et al.	5
order and submits a $450 check for the filing fee in appeal no. 2008-1572. Stoller has

not paid the fee for any of the other seven appeals listed above.

When the court states "no further extensions," it means it. These words are not

lightly or routinely added to orders. Because Stoller failed to pay the filing fee for appeal

no. 2008-1572 within the time set by the court's January 5 order, his motion for

reconsideration with respect to that appeal is denied and his check is returned herewith.

With respect to the other seven above-captioned appeals, Stoller has not paid the fee or

offered any reason why the motion for reconsideration should be granted. Thus, with

respect to those seven appeals, Stoller's motion for reconsideration is frivolous and is

denied on that basis.

In addition, Stoller's submission entitled "Response to Court Order Dated

January 5, 2009" seeks reconsideration of the January 5 order, which itself denied

Stoller's reconsideration motion of the court's order denying his in forma pauperis

motion. Repetitive reconsideration motions are not permitted by the Federal Rules of

Appellate Procedure or the Federal Circuit Rules. Stoller submits what he deems "new

evidence" in support of his in forma pauperis request. Stoller's "new evidence" consists

of orders issued by other courts granting his in forma pauperis motions in other

proceedings. This court determines that these rulings are irrelevant to whether Stoller is

entitled to proceed in forma pauperis in this court. Stoller's repetitive reconsideration

requests border on frivolous. Stoller is cautioned that if he continues to submit frivolous

and repetitive motions and other submissions to this court, the court may impose

sanctions and filing restrictions.	Any future submissions received from Stoller

concerning these appeals will be placed in the file without further response.

2008-1569 et al.	 6
Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The motion is denied.

FOR THE COURT

MAY - 7 2009

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly

Clerk

DIE Fa/kill" M.US

cc:	Leo Stoller (check enclosed)

Lance G. Johnson, Esq.

Charles J. Meyer, Esq.

Phillip B. Philbin, Esq.

H. Jay Spiegel, Esq.

Alan B. Samlan, Esq.

John S. Mortimer, Esq.

MAY - 7 2009

JAN HORSILY

CLERK

s17

Date

2008-1569 et al.	7