USPTO serial 78197686
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
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.
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Susan B. Flohr
SUSAN B FLOHR BLANK ROME LLP600 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVE NWWASHINGTON, DC 20037UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 008 | cutlery, namely collectors knives | ACTIVE | — |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23, 2006 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 23, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 9, 2006 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 9, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Nov 9, 2005 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Jun 2, 2005 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 2, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 17, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Mar 17, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 16, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 15, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Mar 2, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 2, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 27, 2004 | 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. |
| Jun 1, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 19, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 19, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 6, 2004 | 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. |
| Jul 20, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 16, 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. |
| May 30, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |