USPTO serial 76628178
THE PLATINUM MATTRESS PROTECTOR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KIM, YONG OH
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 THE PLATINUM MATTRESS PROTECTOR?
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.
Kristin Jordan Harkins
KRISTIN JORDAN HARKINS CONLEY ROSE PC5700 GRANITE PKWY STE 330PLANO, TX 75024-6623UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 024 | MATTRESS COVERS AND PADS SOLD IN RESIDENTIAL FURNITURE STORES AND SLEEP STORES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 20, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 19, 2007 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 19, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 4, 2007 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Mar 12, 2007 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Mar 12, 2007 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 28, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Nov 28, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Nov 27, 2006 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Nov 17, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 16, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 16, 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. |
| May 16, 2006 | 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. |
| May 15, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 17, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 28, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 28, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 24, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 24, 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. |
| Aug 18, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 31, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |