USPTO serial 78400853
A WORD IS WORTH A THOUSAND PICTURES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WILKE, JOHN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 104 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with A WORD IS WORTH A THOUSAND PICTURES?
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.
Jeffrey S. Standley
JEFFREY S STANDLEY STANDLEY LAW GROUP LLP495 METRO PL S STE 210DUBLIN, OH 43017UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Interior decorating | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 31, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 31, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 9, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 5, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 5, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 30, 2005 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 23, 2005 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 23, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 14, 2005 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 14, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| May 24, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 9, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 9, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 4, 2005 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| May 4, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 13, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 21, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 21, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 10, 2005 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 10, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 10, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 16, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 16, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 1, 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. |
| Feb 1, 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. |
| Feb 1, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 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. |
| Nov 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. |
| Nov 4, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 21, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |