USPTO serial 75113299
GR-R-REAT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- TANNER, MICHAEL R
- 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 GR-R-REAT?
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
Battle Creek, MI
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jeffrey H. Kaufman
JEFFREY H KAUFMAN OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLANDMAIER & NEUSTADT P1755 JEFFERSON DAVIS HWY FL 4ARLINGTON, VA 22202-3509Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | clothing, namely, golf shirts, polo shirts, sport shirts, T-shirts, sweat shirts, night shirts, sweaters, jackets, shorts, caps | ACTIVE | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 22, 2002 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 11, 2002 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 7, 2001 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 8, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 8, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 22, 2000 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Nov 22, 2000 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| May 12, 2000 | 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. |
| May 9, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 7, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 20, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 20, 1998 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Mar 19, 1998 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Sep 5, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 1997 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 13, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 7, 1996 | 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. |
| Sep 30, 1996 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 16, 1996 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |