USPTO serial 78544140
HARAJUKU LOVERS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LAMOTHE, LESLEY
- 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 HARAJUKU LOVERS?
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
Los Angeles, CA, US
BEVERLY HILLS, CA, US
Los Angeles, CA, US
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jill M. Pietrini
JILL M PIETRINI MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS LLP11355 W OLYMPIC BOULVARDLOS ANGELES, CA 90064UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 018 | Baby carriers worn on the body, baby backpacks, beach umbrellas, calling card cases, dog collars, animal leashes, cat collars, fanny packs, golf umbrellas, horse blankets, and umbrellas | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 3, 2014 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Dec 3, 2014 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 20, 2014 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Jun 20, 2014 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 16, 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. |
| Aug 16, 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. |
| Jan 27, 2010 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 27, 2010 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Dec 15, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Dec 15, 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. |
| Jun 5, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 2, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jun 2, 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. |
| Dec 10, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 10, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Dec 10, 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. |
| Nov 6, 2008 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Nov 6, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Nov 4, 2008 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 4, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 15, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 22, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 2, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 15, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 14, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 14, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 14, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 11, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 10, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 27, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 27, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 27, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 24, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 24, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 24, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 30, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 26, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 26, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 27, 2006 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Oct 24, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 16, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 10, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 10, 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 10, 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. |
| Mar 16, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 27, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 22, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 22, 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. |
| Aug 22, 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. |
| Aug 8, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 19, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |