USPTO serial 78302038
DR. SEARS ZONE APPROVED
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KON, ELISSA GARBER
- 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 DR. SEARS ZONE APPROVED?
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.
Robert M. O'Connell, Jr., Scott L. Allen, Dana Breitman, Soyong Cho, Robert M. Crawford, Jr., John V. Forcier, Andrew L. Jagenow, Ethan Horwitz, P.C., Kevin V. Lam, Ira J. Levy, Shaun E. Ryan, Kenda J. Stewart, Brian L. Wamsley, Robert Blasi, Stephen G. C
Robert M. O'Connell, Jr., Scott L. Allen, Dana Bre Goodwin Procter LLPExchange Place, 53 State StreetAttn: Trademark AdministratorBoston, MA 02109-2881Goods and services
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 Sears, Barry D.
- Other trademarks owned by Sears, Barry D.
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 029
- Similar marks named DR. SEARS ZONE APPROVED
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 5, 2008 | 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 5, 2008 | 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. |
| Jun 20, 2007 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 20, 2007 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 20, 2007 | 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. |
| May 17, 2007 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| May 17, 2007 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| May 4, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 27, 2006 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 27, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Nov 27, 2006 | 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 25, 2006 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 9, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 9, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 9, 2006 | 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 27, 2005 | 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 10, 2005 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Nov 10, 2005 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Feb 7, 2005 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Feb 7, 2005 | OPPF | OPPOSITION PAPERS RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Dec 28, 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. |
| Dec 8, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 21, 2004 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 21, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 4, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 30, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 16, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 29, 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. |
| Jul 28, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 13, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 13, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 27, 2004 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| May 27, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 27, 2004 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 26, 2004 | 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. |
| Mar 26, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |