Drawing for THE CALIFORNIA WET

USPTO serial 78197521

THE CALIFORNIA WET

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 606
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
LAWRENCE, SUSAN KASTRINER
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 THE CALIFORNIA WET?

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.

MATTHEW A. POWELSON

F DAVID LARIVIERE LARIVIERE, GRUBMAN & PAYNE LLP19 UPPER RAGSDALE DR STE 200MONTEREY, CA 93942UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
021Surface water removal systems; namely, hand held, wand and extension applicators for applying and removing waxes, polishers, cleaning agents, and cleaners; and handled blades edged with silicone, rubber, or similar material for removing liquids from curved or flat surfacesACTIVE—

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

Latest event (MAB6): 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.

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Jan 3, 2006MAB6ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe 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 3, 2006ABN6ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe 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 3, 2005NOAMNOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANTA 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.
Feb 3, 2005MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Dec 21, 2004COARTEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED—
Sep 27, 2004ETOPEXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE PROCESS - TERMINATED—
May 14, 2004ETOFEXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED—
Apr 27, 2004PUBOPUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITIONYour 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.
Apr 7, 2004NPUBNOTICE OF PUBLICATION—
Feb 19, 2004CNSAAPPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER—
Dec 10, 2003TCCATEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED—
Dec 9, 2003CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Dec 9, 2003TROATEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVEDThis 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.
Dec 9, 2003TCCATEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED—
Jun 14, 2003GNRTNON-FINAL ACTION E-MAILEDA 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 11, 2003DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance