USPTO serial 74581437
INDASH
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SMIGA, HOWARD
- 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 INDASH?
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.
Kit M. Stetina
KIT M STETINA STETINA BRUNDA GARRED & BRUCKER75 ENTERPRISE, STE 250ALISO VIEJO, CA 92656UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | cellular telephone mounts | ABANDONED | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 14, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 6, 1999 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 6, 1999 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Sep 19, 1998 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Sep 9, 1998 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Oct 31, 1997 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 29, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 11, 1997 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Apr 7, 1997 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Dec 6, 1996 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Dec 6, 1996 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 2, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 11, 1996 | 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 18, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 17, 1995 | 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 3, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |