USPTO serial 76082764
RAZOR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FIRST, VIVIAN M
- 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 RAZOR?
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.
Diana Michelle Sobo
DIANA MICHELLE SOBO BROWDY AND NEIMARK624 NINTH ST NWWASHINGTON, DC 20001UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | CLOTHING BELTS, HATS, GLOVES, SOCKS, SHOES, AND BOOTS EXCLUDING NECKWEAR, AND SOLD EXCLUSIVELY AS A PROMOTION OF SCOOTERS, ROLLER SKATES, AND INLINE SKATES | ACTIVE | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 12, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 31, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Oct 31, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 29, 2003 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 29, 2003 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Mar 27, 2003 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2003 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Mar 26, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 13, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Nov 12, 2002 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Nov 3, 2002 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 22, 2002 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 3, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 3, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 1, 2002 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Sep 20, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 11, 2002 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 6, 2002 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| May 23, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 21, 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. |
| Aug 23, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 23, 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. |
| Dec 28, 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 16, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |