USPTO serial 78483003
AG
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- NADELMAN, ANDREA KOYNER
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - 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 AG?
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.
Edward W. Goebel,Jr.
EDWARD W GOEBEL,JR. MACDONALD ILLIG JONES & BRITTON LLP100 STATE ST STE 700ERIE, PA 16507-1459UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | Doll House Furnishings, Namely Cakes, Pies, Desserts and Other Food Items | ACTIVE | Jan 1, 2002 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 25, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| May 25, 2007 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| May 24, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 9, 2007 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Oct 11, 2006 | GNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 11, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 30, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 5, 2006 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 5, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| May 25, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 22, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| May 22, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| May 17, 2006 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| May 8, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 8, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 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. |
| Nov 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. |
| Nov 4, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 19, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 19, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 18, 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. |
| Apr 18, 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. |
| Apr 13, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 21, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |