Drawing for BEST EYE

USPTO serial 76412115

BEST EYE

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 606
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
SINGLETON, RUDY
Law office
DIVISIONAL UNIT

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 BEST EYE?

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.

Herbert H. Finn

SUSAN L HELLER LOEB & LOEB LLP10100 SANTA MONICA BLVD STE 2200LOS ANGELES, CA 90067-4164UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
009SPECTROPHOTOMETER AND ASSOCIATED SOFTWARE FOR MEASURING CONFORMITY OF DIVERGENCE'S OF PRINTED DOCUMENTS IN RELATION TO PRINTING SPECIFICATIONSACTIVE—

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 8, 2005MAB6ABANDONMENT 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 8, 2005ABN6ABANDONMENT - 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.
Sep 8, 2004EX1GSOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED—
Aug 30, 2004EXT1SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED—
Aug 30, 2004EEXTSOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVEDThe 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.
Apr 16, 2004TCCATEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED—
Mar 2, 2004NOAMNOA 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 6, 2004TCCATEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED—
Dec 9, 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.
Nov 19, 2003NPUBNOTICE OF PUBLICATION—
Sep 29, 2003CNSAAPPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER—
Aug 13, 2003CFITCASE FILE IN TICRS—
Jul 3, 2003MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Jun 30, 2003CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Dec 30, 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.
Dec 16, 2002DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Oct 1, 2002DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Sep 19, 2002DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Sep 17, 2002TCCATEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED—
Sep 13, 2002DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance