USPTO serial 77109226
ARMOR CASE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SAITO, KIM
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - 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 ARMOR CASE?
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.
Nicholas R. Gunn
Nicholas R Gunn IRONMARK LAW GROUP, PLLC2311 N 45TH ST STE 365SEATTLE, WA 98103-6905UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Cases for handheld electronic devices, namely, cellular phones, mobile phones, smart phones, personal digital assistants (PDA), cameras, global positioning systems, and tablet computers | ACTIVE | Mar 28, 2005 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 28, 2013 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 1, 2012 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Feb 1, 2012 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Feb 1, 2012 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 7, 2011 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Mar 7, 2011 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Mar 5, 2011 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Mar 5, 2011 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 8, 2010 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2010 | 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. |
| Sep 8, 2010 | 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. |
| Aug 3, 2010 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 3, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 31, 2010 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 3, 2010 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Feb 3, 2010 | 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. |
| Feb 3, 2010 | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 23, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 23, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 23, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 23, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 23, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 23, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 17, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 17, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 17, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 6, 2007 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 6, 2007 | 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 6, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 5, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 21, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |