USPTO serial 73833925
Serial No. 73833925
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HANKIN, NANCY
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 Serial No. 73833925?
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
ST. HYACINTHE, QUEBEC, CA
ST. HYACINTHE, QUEBEC, CA
ST-HYACINTHE, QUEBEC, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
JAMES M. SLATTERY
JAMES M SLATTERY BIRCH, STEWART, KOLASCH & BIRCHP O BOX 747FALLS CHURCH, VA 22040-0747UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | ICE SKATES | ABANDONED | Feb 15, 1987 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 15, 1995 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 3, 1995 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 3, 1995 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| May 24, 1994 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 11, 1994 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Apr 26, 1993 | 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. |
| Dec 28, 1992 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Dec 10, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 2, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 28, 1992 | 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. |
| Aug 19, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 3, 1992 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Feb 28, 1992 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 28, 1992 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 8, 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. |
| Sep 6, 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 18, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 14, 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 12, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |