Tabberone is pronounced tab ber won not tay ber own

Tabbers Temptations     www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/ Home | Site Index | Disclaimer | Email Me!   "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" Edmund Burke

Security Essentials & Patricia L. Urban Cyber Cops Hall Of Shame Members Added December 2, 2007

Security Essentials, LLP, is located at 29525 Chagrin Blvd., Ste. 318, Pepper Pike, OH 44122. It appears to be run by Patricia L. Urban. Their email address is purban1@msn.com and purban@securityessentialsllc.com. Their web site is http://securityessentialsllc.com/, but wait, they don't have a web site. They have a web address that they appear to use for what? Email address? And, it's hosted, er, we mean, parked, by GoDaddy.com. What sort of cheap-ass outfit gets a web domain and "parks it"?

The only company that we know about that Security Essentials, LLP represents is SalonQuest Aquage Products. We address her misdirected views on the Salon Quest page. She does not appear to be a lawyer but her email makes threats like she is. If she is, she a dumb one. She seems to just make threats because SalonQuest Aquage Products has yet to follow-up and take any real action. Meow. These people are not the least bit concerned in the law but in following the orders of their clients for their fees. In support of this, as lawyers they are ethically required to know their field of practice. If they are going after trademark and copyright infringers, then they need to know the law. From their emails, they do not. In our opinion, that makes them bottom-feeders. And who would believe Patricia L. Urban anyway? Certainly not the Federal District Court in New Jersey which politely called her a liar:

"We should note here that the court discounted the testimony of Ms. Urban and Ms. Jones, who testified generally as to the condition of the Matrix goods they observed in the Cosmetique stores. Not only is this testimony contradicted by i) evidence of the large number of resold items, ii) the court's own observations of the items offered in evidence, and iii) the testimony concerning the high quality of the Cosmetique retailing operation, but these and other Matrix witnesses in this and other situations often seemed to shade their testimony in any area which they thought would be significant to Matrix in this litigation." [emphasis added]

See Matrix Essentials v. Cosmetic Gallery, 870 F. Supp. 1237, 1245 (D.N.J. 1994) Can we say, "Liar, liar, pants on fire"? The court did.