Oracle files notice of appearance for JavaScript trademark [pdf]

Yes, and Ryan Dahl (creator of Node and Deno), posted Dear Oracle, Please Release the JavaScript Trademark on his website to market that petition.

Looks like not typically unless the case is exceptional based on my reading of: https://www.tuckerellis.com/webfiles/FTD-1908-Lauridsen-Broo...

I'm not a trial attorney, but I've done more than my share of dealing with my own civil suits, and your guess is pretty much bang-on.

The rules of civil procedure generally require that the defendant in a suit file a response within a prescribed timeline, even if the response just amounts to saying, "yeah, we're here". That's what the "as required pursuant to 37 CFR §2.119 and TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD MANUAL OF PROCEDURE §113.04" part is about. I'm not familiar with the specifics about federal procedure for trademark suits, and I'm not going to go look, but if you chase those references down, you're almost sure to find something like this. In some jurisdictions, failure to enter an appearance is reason enough for the other party to request a hearing to be granted default judgment, and for the court to set a date for the hearing, hear the request, and then grant it unless the defendant had a good reason for not filing a timely response.

(The other comments aren't strictly wrong, but mere information about who a given party's lawyers are is generally communicated through notices for designation of counsel.)

No surprise here. If someone files to cancel your trademark and you want to fight it, you file an appearance.

I'm really curious about Oracle's motivation for fighting this. What value do they see in continuing to hold a trademark they aren't really using, and no one associates with them anyway?