USPTO serial 77604069
GENUINE ARTICLE BY CYNTHIA ROWLEY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- VERHOSEK, WILLIAM T
- 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 GENUINE ARTICLE BY CYNTHIA ROWLEY?
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.
Edward M. Weisz
EDWARD M. WEISZ Cozen O'Connor277 Park AvenueNew York, NY 10172UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 008 | Hardware, hand tools and supplies, namely, scissors, tool belts, spackle knives, miter boxes, hack saws, trowels, pruners, rakes and tool aprons | ACTIVE | — |
| 021 | Gardening gloves, bucket organizers specifically adapted for affixation to a bucket for holding gardening supplies, cleaning supplies and hardware tools; watering cans; light duty utility and work gloves | ACTIVE | — |
| 026 | Sewing baskets, sewing boxes; sewing kit comprising, thimbles, hem and stitch gauge, safety pins, thread, sewing needles, sewing pins, setting pins, marking pins, measuring tapes, marking tool for fabric, scissors | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Rowley, Cynthia
- Other trademarks owned by Rowley, Cynthia
- Other trademarks in Class 008
- Other trademarks in Class 021
- Other trademarks in Class 026
- Similar marks named GENUINE ARTICLE BY CYNTHIA ROWLEY
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 19, 2012 | 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. |
| Mar 19, 2012 | 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. |
| Aug 24, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 23, 2011 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 15, 2011 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2011 | 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. |
| Jul 25, 2011 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 10, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 2011 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 2, 2011 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Feb 2, 2011 | 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. |
| Oct 7, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 7, 2010 | NOAC | CORRECTED NOA E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 6, 2010 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 6, 2010 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 28, 2010 | IROA | RESPONSE TO ITU OFFICE ACTION ENTERED | — |
| Sep 28, 2010 | 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. |
| Sep 16, 2010 | INCD | ITU OFFICE ACTION ISSUED FOR DIVISIONAL REQUEST | — |
| Sep 16, 2010 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Aug 16, 2010 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 16, 2010 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 16, 2010 | 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. |
| Aug 16, 2010 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 16, 2010 | 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. |
| Nov 24, 2009 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 24, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 16, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 13, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 8, 2009 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 8, 2009 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 8, 2009 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 8, 2009 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 6, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 5, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 5, 2009 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 11, 2009 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Aug 11, 2009 | 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. |
| Aug 11, 2009 | 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 7, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 7, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 7, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 22, 2009 | 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 27, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2009 | 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 26, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 3, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |