USPTO serial 73745653
THE ORIGINAL DR. SEARS BABY SLING
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FICKES, JERI J
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with THE ORIGINAL DR. SEARS BABY SLING?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Owner
SAN CLEMENTE, CA
SAN CLEMENTE, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
WALTER G. MAXWELL
WALTER G MAXWELL CHRISTIE, PARKER & HALEP O BOX 7068PASADENA, CA 91109-7068UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 018 | SLING-TYPE BABY CARRIER WORN OVER THE SHOULDER FOR CARRYING BABIES OR INFANTS | ABANDONED | Mar 10, 1988 |
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 14, 1991 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jul 26, 1991 | ABN4 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Jul 26, 1991 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jul 26, 1991 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jan 22, 1991 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jul 24, 1990 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Jun 23, 1990 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 30, 1990 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 7, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 6, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 7, 1989 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Mar 21, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 21, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 1, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 21, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 23, 1988 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 23, 1988 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |