USPTO serial 78308123
EARTHLITE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MANDIR, FREDERICK
- 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 EARTHLITE?
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
Common Law Partnership of Christian Durr and Dawn Spring Toglia
Cincinnati, OH
Other trademarks owned by Common Law Partnership of Christian Durr and Dawn Spring Toglia
Common Law Partnership of Christian Durr and Dawn Spring Toglia
Cincinnati, OH
Other trademarks owned by Common Law Partnership of Christian Durr and Dawn Spring Toglia
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 014 | time pieces with illumination accessory sold as a unit, namely, clocks and watches | 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 Common Law Partnership of Christian Durr and Dawn Spring Toglia
- Other trademarks owned by Common Law Partnership of Christian Durr and Dawn Spring Toglia
- Other trademarks in Class 014
- Similar marks named EARTHLITE
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 3, 2006 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| Jun 6, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 2006 | 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. |
| Oct 4, 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. |
| Sep 9, 2005 | WOAG | WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY GRANTED | — |
| Sep 9, 2005 | WOAR | TEAS WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 12, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 22, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 1, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 25, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 23, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 18, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Dec 8, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 8, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 19, 2004 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Nov 19, 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. |
| Apr 27, 2004 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 23, 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. |
| Apr 22, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 17, 2003 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 17, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |