USPTO serial 75795498
BEST PRACTICES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MULLEN, MARK
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 BEST PRACTICES?
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
Salt Lake City, UT
Salt Lake City, UT
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Michael M. Conger
MICHAEL F. KRIEGER KIRTON & MCCONKIE60 E S TEMPLE, STE 1800SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 29, 2009 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jun 29, 2009 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Dec 8, 2008 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 8, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Dec 1, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 30, 2008 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jun 14, 2008 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 2, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 30, 2008 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 3, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 29, 2007 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Aug 27, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 1, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 30, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Feb 8, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 4, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 29, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 30, 2006 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Apr 14, 2006 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Apr 14, 2006 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jan 10, 2002 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Oct 18, 2001 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 4, 2001 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Aug 15, 2001 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 5, 2001 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 23, 2001 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Feb 12, 2001 | 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 30, 2000 | 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. |
| Nov 30, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 24, 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. |
| Feb 28, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 11, 2000 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Oct 5, 1999 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |