Drawing for DJU

USPTO serial 76404763

DJU

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 606
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
TURNER, JASON FITZGERALD
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 DJU?

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.

Brad D. Rose, Esq.

BRAD D ROSE ESQ PRYOR CASHMAN SHERMAN & FLYNN410 PARK AVENEW YORK, NY 10022UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
009PROTECTIVE EYEWEAR; SUNGLASSES; EYEGLASSES; EYEGLASS FRAMES; EYEGLASS, SUNGLASSES AND SPECTACLE CASES; EYEGLASS, SUNGLASSES AND SPECTACLE STRAPS; EYEGLASS, SUNGLASSES AND SPECTACLE CHAINS; EYEGLASS, SUNGLASSES AND SPECTACLE CLEANING CLOTHS; VIDEO GAME CARTRIDGESACTIVE—

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

Latest event (MAB6): 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.

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Jun 13, 2006MAB6ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe 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 13, 2006ABN6ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe 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.
Oct 31, 2005EX5GSOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED—
Oct 11, 2005MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Oct 6, 2005EXT5SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED—
May 3, 2005EX4GSOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED—
Apr 8, 2005EXT4SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED—
Apr 8, 2005MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Oct 13, 2004MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Oct 7, 2004EX3GSOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED—
Oct 7, 2004EXT3SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED—
Apr 15, 2004CFITCASE FILE IN TICRS—
Apr 7, 2004MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Apr 5, 2004EX2GSOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED—
Apr 5, 2004EXT2SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED—
Oct 27, 2003EX1GSOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED—
Sep 26, 2003MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Sep 24, 2003EXT1SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED—
Apr 8, 2003NOAMNOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANTA 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 14, 2003PUBOPUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITIONYour 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.
Dec 25, 2002NPUBNOTICE OF PUBLICATION—
Nov 15, 2002CNSAAPPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER—
Oct 28, 2002CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Oct 28, 2002MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Aug 27, 2002CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance