USPTO serial 76171227
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
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.
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
HERBERT DUBNO
HERBERT DUBNO THE FIRM OF KARL F ROSS PC5676 RIVERDALE AVE # 900BRONX, NY 10471-2138UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 024 | cloth labels, bed blankets, bed linen, bed sheets, duvet covers, curtains, table linen, pillow cases, all in finished form for the consumer | ACTIVE | — |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 24, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 23, 2004 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 23, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 23, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 23, 2004 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Jun 26, 2003 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Jun 4, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| May 28, 2003 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Apr 29, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Apr 29, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Apr 29, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Apr 18, 2003 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Mar 27, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 27, 2003 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 30, 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. |
| Jun 19, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 12, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 6, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 6, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 24, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 24, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 12, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 4, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 15, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 8, 2002 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Dec 4, 2001 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 4, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 4, 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. |
| May 20, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |