USPTO serial 78368914
THE ONE RING
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SMIGA, HOWARD
- 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 THE ONE RING?
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.
Carole F. Barrett
Carole F. Barrett Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & RabkinThree Embarcadero Center, 7th FloorSAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111-4024UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 014 | Precious metals and their alloys; precious stones; ankle bracelets, bracelets, brooches, charms, cigarette lighters of precious metal, clocks, clocks incorporating radios, non-monetary coins of precious metal, ear clips, figurines and figural products, namely, collectible figurines and figurines incorporated into settings, made of precious metals and their alloys, hat ornaments of precious metal, lapel pins, ornamental lapel pins, medallions, ornamental pins, pins being jewelry, pocket watches, shoe ornaments of precious metal, tie pins, watch fobs, watches, watches containing a game function, wristwatches | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 15, 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. |
| May 15, 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. |
| Dec 7, 2007 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Nov 8, 2007 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 8, 2007 | EISU | TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED | The applicant filed a Statement of Use with specimens showing the mark in actual commerce. The USPTO will review the filing for compliance. If accepted, the mark can proceed to registration; if deficient, the USPTO may issue a requirement or office action. |
| Nov 8, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 2, 2007 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 2, 2007 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Nov 2, 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 7, 2007 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| May 7, 2007 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| May 7, 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. |
| Mar 10, 2007 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 7, 2007 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Feb 7, 2007 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 7, 2007 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 19, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 19, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 10, 2006 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| May 10, 2006 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| May 10, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| May 10, 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. |
| Oct 27, 2005 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 27, 2005 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Oct 27, 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. |
| May 10, 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. |
| Feb 15, 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. |
| Jan 26, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 10, 2004 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 10, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 3, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 1, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 15, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 15, 2004 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | 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. |
| Sep 8, 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. |
| Sep 8, 2004 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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 7, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 1, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |