USPTO serial 76663956
ROOM TO GROW
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WEBSTER, WILLIAM M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with ROOM TO GROW?
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.
Owner
San Francisco, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Christopher S. Beer
CHRISTOPHER S BEER IRONMARK LAW GROUP PLLC2311 N 45TH ST STE 365SEATTLE, WA 98103-6905UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10, 2008 | MAB0 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Mar 10, 2008 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 5, 2008 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Feb 4, 2008 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 30, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 30, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 28, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 24, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 24, 2007 | 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. |
| Jul 23, 2007 | 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. |
| Jul 18, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 18, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 18, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 2, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 29, 2006 | 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. |
| Dec 28, 2006 | 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. |
| Dec 27, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Aug 7, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |