USPTO serial 76553009
HIP-HOP EXPRESS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SOUDERS, MICHAEL J
- 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 HIP-HOP EXPRESS?
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
Long Beach, CA
Long Beach, CA
Costa Mesa, CA
Costa Mesa, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Darin Margules
DARIN MARGULES TYRE KAMINS KATZ & GRANOF1880 CENTURY PARK E STE 300LOS ANGELES, CA 90067UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 018 | Handbags, Backpacks, Purses, Duffle Bags, Overnight Bags, Travel Bags, Wallets and Luggage | ACTIVE | — |
| 025 | Clothing, namely hats, baseball caps, shirts, tops, blouses, t-shirts, sweaters, sweatshirts, tank tops, bottoms, pants, shorts, dresses, skirts, socks, underwear, coats, jackets, footwear and shoes | ACTIVE | — |
| 035 | Mail order catalog services featuring clothes and bags, and mail order services featuring clothes and bags | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Piontak, Leonard
- Other trademarks owned by Piontak, Leonard
- Other trademarks owned by Rugg, Doug
- Other trademarks owned by Rugg, Doug
- Other trademarks in Class 018
- Other trademarks in Class 025
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Similar marks named HIP-HOP EXPRESS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 30, 2005 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 2005 | 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. |
| Dec 21, 2004 | 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 28, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 8, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 29, 2004 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 29, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 27, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 27, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 27, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 27, 2004 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Apr 15, 2004 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Apr 14, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 4, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |