USPTO serial 78515064
BLOCK 'N' ROLL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KHOURI, SANI PHILIPPE
- 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 BLOCK 'N' ROLL?
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.
Matthew T. Latimer
Matthew T. Latimer Latimer Intellectual Property Law, LLPSuite 12213873 Park Center RoadHerndon, VA 20171Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 020 | Hose guide chocks, namely wheel chocks made primarily of plastic incorporating rollers for preventing hoses from binding on objects | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 3, 2008 | 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. |
| Nov 3, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 2, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 2, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Apr 2, 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 2, 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. |
| Jul 10, 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. |
| Jun 20, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 1, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 1, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 14, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 14, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| May 14, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| May 14, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| May 14, 2007 | 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 14, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 27, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 27, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 27, 2007 | 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 30, 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. |
| Oct 30, 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. |
| Oct 11, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 27, 2006 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 27, 2006 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Jul 28, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 28, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 26, 2006 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Jul 26, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 26, 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. |
| Jul 26, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 20, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 27, 2006 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| May 5, 2006 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| May 5, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 10, 2006 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 8, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 13, 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. |
| Jan 13, 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 17, 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. |
| Jun 17, 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. |
| Jun 16, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 16, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |