USPTO serial 78389392
CAVALIER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BEVERLY, JOSETTE MICHELLE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 CAVALIER?
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.
Joseph W. Berenato, III
JOSEPH W BERENATO III LINIAK, BERENATO & WHITE LLCSTE 240 6550 ROCK SPRING DRBETHESDA, MD 20817UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 019 | Non-metal doors made from wood composite and solid wood components | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 9, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Oct 2, 2007 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Oct 2, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jul 18, 2007 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Jun 19, 2006 | GNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 6, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 28, 2006 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 28, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 21, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 23, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 23, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 31, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 31, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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 23, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 2, 2005 | 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. |
| May 2, 2005 | 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. |
| Oct 4, 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. |
| Oct 4, 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 30, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 1, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |