USPTO serial 75353942
BLADE MALLET
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BORSUK, ESTHER
- 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 BLADE MALLET?
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.
HERBERT L ALLEN
HERBERT L ALLEN ALLEN DYER DOPPELT MILBRATH & GILCHRISTP O BOX 3791ORLANDO, FL 32802UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | golf equipment and articles for use in the game of golf, namely, golf clubs, golf balls, golf grips, golf shafts, and parts and fittings therefor | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 20, 2001 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 20, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 20, 2001 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Dec 20, 2001 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 20, 2001 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Oct 12, 2001 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Oct 12, 2001 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Mar 12, 2001 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2001 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Dec 13, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 15, 2000 | 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. |
| May 31, 2000 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Feb 17, 2000 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Dec 9, 1999 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 1999 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jul 1, 1999 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Apr 27, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 12, 1998 | 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. |
| Oct 26, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 12, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 10, 1998 | 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. |
| Feb 1, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |