USPTO serial 76294595
NAVAJO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DE JONGE, KATHLEEN
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 NAVAJO?
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.
JEFF A. MCDANIEL
JEFF A MCDANIEL DAFFER MCDANIEL LLPPO BOX 684908AUSTIN, TX 78768-4908UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 024 | Bed spreads, pillow shams, bed pads, table linens, namely, tablecloths, coasters, napkins, fabric napkins, fabric place mats, and fabric table runners, curtains, draperies, and handkerchiefs | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by NAVAJO BRANDS HOLDING, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by Navajo Jeans, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Navajo Jeans, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 024
- Similar marks named NAVAJO
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 16, 2009 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Nov 16, 2009 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Apr 8, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 6, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Apr 6, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 10, 2008 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Oct 22, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 21, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Oct 20, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 17, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| May 1, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 21, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 17, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Oct 26, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 18, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 16, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 5, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 17, 2007 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Jan 23, 2007 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Jan 3, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 4, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 4, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 15, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 14, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 13, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 18, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 17, 2006 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jul 29, 2005 | 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 29, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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 12, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 10, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 17, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 6, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 6, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 3, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 21, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 17, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 12, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 12, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 9, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 9, 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. |
| Sep 27, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 19, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |