USPTO serial 76059333
SNOBALL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CORDOVA, RAUL
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 SNOBALL?
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.
SETH M. NEHRBASS
SETH M NEHRBASS GARVEY, SMITH, NEHRBASS & DODDY LLC3838 N CAUSEWAY BLVD STE 3290METAIRIE, LA 70002UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | ice shaving machines for sale to retail business selling shaved ice confections | ACTIVE | Jun 15, 1955 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 21, 2005 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 7, 2004 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 6, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 5, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 5, 2004 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Jun 8, 2004 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 9, 2004 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2003 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Jun 12, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 12, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 12, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 5, 2003 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| May 27, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 19, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 19, 2003 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 19, 2002 | 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. |
| Oct 3, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 5, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 12, 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. |
| May 7, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 7, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 25, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 25, 2001 | 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, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 29, 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. |
| Nov 29, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |