USPTO serial 76613851
HARRY HARE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SAPPENFIELD, ANN
- 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 HARRY HARE?
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.
Charles D. Wilbert
CHARLES D WILBERT LAW OFFICES OF CHARLES D WILBERT16633 VENTURA BLVD STE 900ENCINO, CA 91436-1804UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | Lunch box lunch pail | 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 19, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 19, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 4, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 10, 2007 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Sep 10, 2007 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Sep 10, 2007 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 10, 2007 | 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. |
| Jul 10, 2007 | 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. |
| May 7, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 7, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 15, 2006 | 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. |
| Jul 26, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 9, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 18, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 29, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 22, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 27, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 27, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 28, 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. |
| Dec 28, 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. |
| Jun 1, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 1, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 26, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 13, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |