USPTO serial 76582359
HOT BOX SEXSURVIVALKITS.COM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CROWLEY, SEAN MICHAEL
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 HOT BOX SEXSURVIVALKITS.COM?
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.
Brian L. Alpert
SIMOR L MOSKOWITZ JACOBSON HOLMAN PLLC400 7TH ST NW STE 600WASHINGTON, DC 20004UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Retail store services offered via a global computer network, mail order services and catalog services featuring gift packages containing products of primarily an erotic, sensual or sexual nature, namely, adult novelties, adult toys and games, marital and sexual aids, sexual devices and products, sexual stimulants, condoms, perfumes, massage oils, lotions and candles | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 13, 2006 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Nov 20, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Sep 20, 2006 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| May 20, 2006 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| May 20, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 17, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 7, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 7, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 17, 2006 | PGTT | PETITION GRANTED - TTAB APPEAL FILED | — |
| Feb 1, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 17, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 17, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 17, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 17, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 17, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jan 17, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 17, 2006 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Nov 17, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 17, 2005 | 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. |
| Sep 9, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 21, 2005 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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 21, 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. |
| Apr 13, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 6, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 6, 2005 | 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 6, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 6, 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. |
| Oct 6, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 29, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 8, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |