USPTO serial 73794170
HAND HAMMERED WOK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHARPER JR, SAM
- Law office
- OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with HAND HAMMERED WOK?
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.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
ANTHONY O. CORMIER
ANTHONY O CORMIER LAW OFFICE OF ANTHONY O CORMIER23161 VENTURA BLVD STE 102WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91364UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | COOKING SET PRIMARILY COMPRISING A WOK, RING, DOME, BRUSH, LADLE AND CHOPSTICKS | ACTIVE | May 23, 1980 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 28, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 21, 1992 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 16, 1992 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jul 16, 1992 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Jun 12, 1992 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Apr 10, 1992 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Nov 18, 1991 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 28, 1991 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jun 29, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 1, 1991 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Mar 11, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 12, 1990 | 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. |
| Jul 30, 1990 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 28, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 4, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 5, 1990 | 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. |
| Dec 18, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 22, 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. |
| Jun 19, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |