USPTO serial 78076850
EARTH TONES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SUAREZ, MARIA VICTORIA
- 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 EARTH TONES?
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.
Keith P. Hartzell
SHELLI T CLARK TAFT, STETTINIUS & HOLLISTER LLP12 TH FL21 E STATE STCOLUMBUS, OH 43215-4221Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Sunglasses | ACTIVE | — |
| 025 | Sportswear and casual clothing, namely, pants, slacks, skirts, dresses, jumpers, blouses, shirts, socks, hosiery, tights, scarves, sashes, hats, caps, shoes, sandals, slippers, sneakers, athletic shoes, ties, cravats, ascots, swim trunks, and sweat suits | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 3, 2005 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 13, 2005 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 3, 2005 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jan 3, 2005 | 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 6, 2004 | 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. |
| Apr 13, 2004 | 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. |
| Mar 24, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 16, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 30, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 23, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 23, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 20, 2004 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 9, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 25, 2003 | 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. |
| Apr 29, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 19, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 27, 2003 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Mar 27, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 13, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 13, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 8, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 12, 2002 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 22, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 5, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 18, 2001 | 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. |
| Sep 14, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |