USPTO serial 76245300
BRAND Q
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- VERHOSEK, WILLIAM T
- 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 BRAND Q?
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
Laguna Beach, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Paula J. Krasny
PAULA J KRASNY BAKER & MCKENZIE130 E RANDOLPH ST STE 3700CHICAGO, IL 60601-6316UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | brand and brand management consulting services for others, namely, brand development and design services; development of corporate and brand identity systems; brand strategy services; product development services; market research services; product placement services; corporate marketing, promotional, advertising and public relations services; organizational development services; strategic planning services; provision of learning systems and feedback information management services; corporate image and message development services; name generation and trademark development services | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 1, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 8, 2004 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Jul 19, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Apr 22, 2002 | 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. |
| Jan 10, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 22, 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 14, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |