USPTO serial 75978468
PERFORMANCE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GAYNOR, BARBARA ANNE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 PERFORMANCE?
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
Chapel Hill, NC
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
David W. Sar
DAVID W SAR BROOKS, PIERCE, MCLENDON, HUMPHREY & LEO2000 RENAISSANCE PLZ230 N ELM STGREENSBORO, NC 27401Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | clothing, namely, jerseys, shirts, T-shirts, tank tops, shorts, skin suits, vests, jackets, briefs, tights, pants, pantsuits, headbands, gloves, socks, wetsuits, shoes, sandals and unitards | ACTIVE | Jan 13, 1982 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2, 2015 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Aug 8, 2007 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Aug 6, 2007 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Jul 11, 2007 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Dec 26, 2006 | 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 23, 2006 | 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. |
| Dec 6, 2006 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Dec 6, 2006 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| May 22, 2006 | 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. |
| May 22, 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. |
| Sep 11, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 9, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 9, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 21, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 7, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 3, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 2, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 24, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 25, 1999 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| May 24, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 26, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 21, 1998 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Oct 17, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 17, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 29, 1997 | 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 15, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 4, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |