USPTO serial 76086734
OFFICIAL PEE WEE BRAND
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BUONGIORNO, CHRISTOPHER L
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - 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 OFFICIAL PEE WEE BRAND?
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.
JEFFREY G. SHELDON
Shannon S. Imlay c/o Sheldon Mak Rose & Anderson100 East Corson Street, Third FloorPasadena, CA 91103-3842UNITED 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 22, 2008 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 31, 2008 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 31, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 28, 2008 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Nov 9, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 12, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| May 29, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| May 29, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| May 25, 2003 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Apr 28, 2003 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 17, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 12, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 12, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 11, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 9, 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. |
| Jul 22, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 22, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 17, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 27, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 1, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 16, 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. |
| Jan 31, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 24, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |