USPTO serial 76398474
NUMBER (N)INE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SINGLETON, RUDY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with NUMBER (N)INE?
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
Tokyo 1500013, JP
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
CHARLES M. MARMELSTEIN
CHARLES M MARMELSTEIN ARENT FOX KINTNER PLOTKIN & KAHN PLLC1050 CONNECTICUT AVE NWSTE 400, DC 92003-6533Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | Clothing for sale in high-end retail clothing stores, namely, t-shirts and pants; outerwear, namely, coats, jackets, parkas and rain coats; stoles; caps; and shoes | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 23, 2009 | 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. |
| Mar 20, 2009 | 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. |
| Aug 22, 2008 | 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. |
| Aug 22, 2008 | 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 29, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 29, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 21, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 28, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 27, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 1, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 1, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 30, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 19, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 18, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 29, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 15, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 28, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 19, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 18, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 5, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 5, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 18, 2003 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 18, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 7, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 15, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 15, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 27, 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. |
| Aug 23, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |