USPTO serial 75670396
SINGLE SOURCE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STINE, DAVID
- 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 SINGLE SOURCE?
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.
KAY LYN SCHWARTZ
KAY LYN SCHWARTZ GARDERE WYNNE SEWELL LLP1601 ELM STDALLAS, TX 75201-4761UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | Providing extended warranty contracts on metal roofs and walls | ACTIVE | Jan 31, 1999 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 17, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Dec 16, 2003 | NAUD | NOTICE OF UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - MAILED | — |
| Nov 3, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 30, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 30, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Oct 24, 2003 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Oct 14, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 8, 2003 | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 27, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 22, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 30, 2002 | 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. |
| Jun 27, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 3, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 2, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 1, 1999 | 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. |
| Aug 17, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |