USPTO serial 76552569
CHICAGO STING
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SAITO, KIM
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 CHICAGO STING?
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
Buffalo Grove, IL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
John S. Mortimer
JOHN S MORTIMER WOOD. PHILLIPS, KATZ500 W MADISON ST STE 3800CHICAGO, IL 60661-2511UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | MEN'S; WOMEN'S AND CHILDREN'S CLOTHING, NAMELY HEADWEAR INCLUDING HATS AND CAPS, PANTS, SHIRTS; SKIRTS, COATS, JACKETS, SHOES, AND ACCESSORIES, NAMELY BELTS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 13, 2006 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Oct 17, 2006 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Oct 17, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Oct 17, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jul 17, 2006 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Mar 3, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Mar 3, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 11, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 6, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Oct 6, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Apr 6, 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. |
| Apr 5, 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. |
| Feb 23, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 6, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 19, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 19, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 19, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 1, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 30, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 30, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 15, 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. |
| Mar 11, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 3, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |