USPTO serial 77292572
LA FIANCÉE D'ARTHUR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MCDOWELL, MATTHEW J
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL UNIT
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 LA FIANCÉE D'ARTHUR?
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.
Joseph E. Washington
JOSEPH E. WASHINGTON MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP1111 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW ATTN TMSUWASHINGTON, DC 20004UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Retail store services, online retail store services, wholesale store services, and wholesale distributorship services in the field of clothing, footwear and headwear | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 1, 2010 | 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. |
| May 31, 2010 | 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 29, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 28, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Oct 28, 2009 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Apr 27, 2009 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 27, 2009 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Apr 27, 2009 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Dec 3, 2008 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Dec 3, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Nov 14, 2008 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 14, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 28, 2008 | 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 5, 2008 | 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 16, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 27, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 27, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 27, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 27, 2008 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 27, 2008 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 27, 2008 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 27, 2008 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 26, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 26, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 26, 2008 | 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, 2008 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jan 17, 2008 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jan 17, 2008 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jan 3, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 4, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |