Drawing for IN GOD WE TRUST

USPTO serial 75528445

IN GOD WE TRUST

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 603
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
SAITO, KIM
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 IN GOD WE TRUST?

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 ET ALPO BOX 3791ORLANDO, FL 32802UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
016inspirational novelty products, namely, pens, business card holders, drawing rulers, drafting rulers, ungraduated rulers, paper clip holders, printed paper signs, letter openers, book covers, paper place mats, plastic place mats, sketch pads, greeting cards, gift wrapping paper, book marks, stationery, writing instrumentsACTIVE—

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
Aug 5, 2003CFITCASE FILE IN TICRS—
Jul 26, 2003ABN3ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Jul 26, 2003JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Jul 26, 2003EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Jun 30, 2003MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Apr 7, 2003RECDACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED—
Nov 18, 2002EXAFEXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB—
Nov 9, 2002JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Nov 7, 2002EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Oct 7, 2002EXAFEXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB—
Sep 24, 2002CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Sep 24, 2002MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Mar 21, 2002CNFRFINAL 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.
Nov 26, 2001CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
May 23, 2001CNRTNON-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.
Feb 26, 2001CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jul 5, 2000CNSLLETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED—
Apr 10, 2000CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Oct 6, 1999CNRTNON-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.
Sep 23, 1999CNEAEXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED—
Mar 23, 1999CNRTNON-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.
Mar 5, 1999DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance