USPTO serial 78477954
DOKTOR MOM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- YOUNG, CARRIE SKYE
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 DOKTOR MOM?
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.
Howard N. Aronson
Howard N. Aronson Lackenbach Siegel LLPOne Chase RoadLackenbach Siegel BuildingScarsdale, NY 10583Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | Medicinal, pharmaceutical and veterinary preparations, namely, ayurvedic preparations and preparations made from natural and herbal substances all for use as pain balms and tonics, but specifically excluding use as cough or cold remedies | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by J.B. CHEMICALS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED
- Other trademarks owned by J.B. CHEMICALS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED
- Other trademarks in Class 005
- Similar marks named DOKTOR MOM
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 10, 2010 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| May 10, 2010 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jun 18, 2009 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 18, 2009 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2009 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Mar 3, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 3, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Mar 3, 2009 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jul 14, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 14, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jul 14, 2008 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Apr 1, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 1, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Apr 1, 2008 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Oct 1, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 1, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Oct 1, 2007 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Apr 10, 2007 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Jan 16, 2007 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Dec 27, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 1, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 1, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 14, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 14, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 9, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 9, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 1, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 24, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 24, 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. |
| Aug 1, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 24, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 24, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 18, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | GRML | CORRESPONDENCE E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | GRML | CORRESPONDENCE E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 6, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 22, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 22, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 31, 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. |
| Mar 31, 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. |
| Mar 30, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 9, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |