USPTO serial 78426943
LILLY PULITZER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- OH, WON TEAK
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 LILLY PULITZER?
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.
Owner
King of Prussia, PA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jeffrey H. Kaufman
JEFFREY H KAUFMAN OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND, MAIER, & NE1940 DUKE STALEXANDRIA, VA 22314UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | Toys, namely plush toys, dolls and accessories therefor | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 23, 2009 | MAB0 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Mar 23, 2009 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Mar 19, 2009 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 2, 2009 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 23, 2008 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Jan 23, 2008 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Oct 12, 2007 | GEA1 | NOTIFICATION OF ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 2007 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 2007 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 1, 2007 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 25, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 23, 2006 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 23, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 6, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jan 6, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Dec 30, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 30, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 30, 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. |
| Jun 30, 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. |
| Jun 22, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 9, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 9, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 20, 2004 | CEPE | COMBINED EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY ACTION ENTERED | — |
| Dec 20, 2004 | GNPE | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT AND/OR PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 20, 2004 | CPEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT AND/OR PRIORITY ACTION - COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 10, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 4, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 4, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |