USPTO serial 75400720
WIMMER-FERGUSON THE DEVELOPMENTAL TOY SPECIALISTS RESEARCH PROVEN DESIGNS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RHIM, ANDREW
- 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 WIMMER-FERGUSON THE DEVELOPMENTAL TOY SPECIALISTS RESEARCH PROVEN DESIGNS?
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.
ELIZABETH C. BUCKINGHAM
DORSEY & WHITNEY LLPPILLSBURY CTR S220 S SIXTH STMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | infant soft toys and hard molded toys, namely rattles, teethers, mobiles | ACTIVE | May 1, 1997 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 11, 2001 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Jul 10, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 21, 2001 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Nov 1, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 4, 2000 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 19, 1999 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Dec 17, 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. |
| Nov 9, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 6, 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. |
| Apr 29, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |