USPTO serial 78555134
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
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.
Grand Rapids, MI
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Catherine S. Collins
CATHERINE S COLLINS VAN DYKE, GARDNER, LINN & BURKHART LLP2851 CHARLEVOIX DR SE STE 207PPO BOX 888695GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49546-8695| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | AFTER-MARKET LIGHTS, INCLUDING LED LIGHTS, FOR VEHICLES, INCLUDING TRUCKS, SUVs, RVs, TRAILERS, BOATS, AUTOMOBILES, CAMPERS, MOTOR HOMES, SNOWMOBILES, AND ATVs | ACTIVE | Jul 31, 2004 |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 3, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Apr 3, 2007 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Apr 3, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Oct 18, 2006 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 18, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 21, 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. |
| Sep 21, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Sep 21, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Sep 21, 2006 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Mar 21, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 21, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 2, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 27, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 27, 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 25, 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 25, 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 25, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 5, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |