USPTO serial 78457691
JUNK IN THE TRUNK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RADEMACHER, MARK A
- 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 JUNK IN THE TRUNK?
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
WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
RICHARD S. ERBE
RICHARD S ERBE THE LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD S ERBEPO BOX 418SIMI VALLEY, CA 93062-0418UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | Clothing, namely hats, caps, shirts, tee shirts, undershirts, dress shirts, casual shirts, polo shirts, underwear, boxers, briefs, panties, bras, pants, shorts, jeans, dress pants, jackets, blouses, skirts, dresses, sweatshirts, sweatpants | ACTIVE | Jul 26, 2004 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 28, 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. |
| Dec 28, 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. |
| Jun 5, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 30, 2006 | 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. |
| May 30, 2006 | 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. |
| May 15, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2005 | GRML | CORRESPONDENCE E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 19, 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. |
| Sep 29, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 6, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 6, 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. |
| May 17, 2005 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 17, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Apr 12, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 12, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 31, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 15, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 15, 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. |
| Mar 4, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 4, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 1, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 5, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |