USPTO serial 76385515
CAPO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GOLD, BARBARA
- 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 CAPO?
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
Virginia Beach, VA
Virginia Beach, VA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
JANINE D. GERAIGERY
Janine D. Geraigery Law Offices of J.D. Geraigery, P.C.1133 Broadway, Suite 916New York, NY 10010UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | Clothing, namely, t-shirts, hats, caps, knit caps, jackets, coats and footwear | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 28, 2009 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 18, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 18, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 19, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 19, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 4, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 4, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 4, 2007 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Dec 5, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 12, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 23, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 25, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 25, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 27, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jun 26, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 26, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 26, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 9, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 8, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 17, 2006 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 5, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 5, 2006 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Apr 5, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 3, 2006 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Feb 14, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 14, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 13, 2005 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Dec 13, 2005 | 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. |
| May 16, 2005 | 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 11, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| Mar 11, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 9, 2005 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Feb 9, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 12, 2005 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Dec 21, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 9, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 30, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 30, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 18, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 6, 2004 | 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. |
| Dec 15, 2003 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 12, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 31, 2003 | 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. |
| Jul 28, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 14, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| May 7, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| May 7, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 4, 2003 | 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. |
| Oct 18, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 5, 2002 | 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. |
| Jul 22, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |