USPTO serial 75791989
LAPD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MICHELI, ANGELA M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with LAPD?
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.
EDWARD M JORDON
EDWARD M JORDON OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY200 NORTH MAIN ST ROOM 700CITY OF LOS ANGELESLOS ANGELES, CA 90012Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | CLOTHING, NAMELY, T-SHIRTS, CAPS, HATS, SWEATSHIRTS, SWEATPANTS, POLO-SHIRTS, SHORTS, SOCKS AND CHILDREN'S CLOTHING, NAMELY, SHIRTS, PANTS, JACKETS, PLAY SUITS, OVERALLS, AND ROMPERS | ACTIVE | Dec 31, 1980 |
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 17, 2007 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Dec 17, 2007 | 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. |
| May 21, 2007 | 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 19, 2007 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| Apr 4, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 4, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 4, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 31, 2007 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 31, 2007 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Mar 19, 2007 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 19, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 16, 2007 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Jan 12, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 3, 2006 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 3, 2006 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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 12, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 25, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 25, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 25, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 15, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 2, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 2, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 21, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 19, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 19, 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. |
| Dec 23, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 17, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |