USPTO serial 78545978
MENORNAMENTS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DELANEY, ZHALEH SYBIL
- 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 MENORNAMENTS?
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.
Melinda B. Buurma
MELINDA B BUURMA HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS PC39400 WOODWARD AVE STE 101BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48304-5151UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 11, 2009 | 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 11, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 21, 2008 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 21, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Oct 16, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 10, 2008 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Apr 29, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 14, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 9, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Oct 19, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 10, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Oct 10, 2007 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 17, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 10, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Apr 10, 2007 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 10, 2006 | 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 18, 2006 | 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 28, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 31, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 19, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 17, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 11, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 2, 2006 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Apr 20, 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. |
| Apr 17, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 15, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 13, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 13, 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 12, 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. |
| Aug 12, 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. |
| Aug 10, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 16, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 24, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |