USPTO serial 78412722
SIMPLE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- JACKSON, STEVEN W
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 107 - 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 SIMPLE?
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.
Douglas J. Christensen
DOUGLAS J CHRISTENSEN PATTERSON, THUENTE, SKAAR & CHRISTENSEN4800 IDS CTR 80 S 8TH STMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-2100UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 020 | office furniture | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 12, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 10, 2007 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 10, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 20, 2007 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Oct 30, 2006 | GNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 30, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 29, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 8, 2006 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 8, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| May 11, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| May 11, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 21, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 9, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 9, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 25, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 4, 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. |
| Oct 4, 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. |
| Sep 23, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Aug 25, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 25, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 23, 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. |
| Jul 21, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 15, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 15, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 2, 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. |
| Dec 2, 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. |
| Dec 2, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 11, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |