Drawing for MOHAWK-SHELBURNE 1935

USPTO serial 74609053

MOHAWK-SHELBURNE 1935

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 603
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
GREENBAUM, CINDY BETH
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 MOHAWK-SHELBURNE 1935?

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.

Timothy W. Hagan

TIMOTHY W HAGAN KILLWORTH, GOTTMAN, HAGAN & SCHAEFFONE DAYTON CTRONE S MAIN ST STE 500DAYTON, OH 45402-2033

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
008hand powered construction tools, namely saws, saw frames, saw blades and drill bitsABANDONEDFeb 28, 1995

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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Feb 19, 1998EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Aug 19, 1997ABN3ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Aug 19, 1997EXPAEX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED—
Nov 19, 1996CNESEXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED—
Oct 17, 1996DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Jul 16, 1996CNCFCONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED—
Jul 9, 1996JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Jun 12, 1996EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Nov 8, 1995CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA 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 21, 1995CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
May 8, 1995CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
May 5, 1995IUAAUSE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED—
May 5, 1995DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
May 5, 1995DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
May 1, 1995AUPCAMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE—
Mar 20, 1995IUAFUSE AMENDMENT FILED—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance