With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". wholly uncontroverted at trial. There was simply no suggestion in this case that Thomas, Hobbs, Green, or Marshak were unaware, at the time of their trademark application, that Atlantic’s recordings of original Drifters songs were being marketed, sold, and played on the radio throughout the United States. The jury was therefore free to conclude that they knew. Atlantic Records’ continuous commercial use of the original Drifters recordings provided clear and convincing evidence that Thomas, Hobbs, and Green committed a fraud upon the Patent and Trademark Office when they certified in 1976 that no other person, firm, corporation or association had the right to use The Drifters trademark in commerce. See Metro Traffic Control Inc. v. Shadow Network Inc., 104 F.3d 336, 340 (Fed.Cir.1997)(<HOLDING>). Charlie Thomas’ Depositions The jury also

A: holding that compliance with registration statute did not abrogate common law and statutory trademark law
B: holding that third party may petition to cancel fraudulently obtained trademark registration
C: holding that irreparable injury exists in a trademark case when the party seeking the injunction shows that it will lose control over the reputation of its trademark pending trial
D: holding that a party fraudulently joined to defeat removal need not join in removal petition
B.