USPTO serial 78568303
MMARTAN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHARLON, BARNEY
- 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 MMARTAN?
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
Pacaembu, Sao Paulo, BR
Pacaembu, Sao Paulo, BR
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
D. Peter Hochberg
D PETER HOCHBERG D PETER HOCHBERG CO LPA1940 E 6TH ST 6TH FLCLEVELAND, OH 44114UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 024 | bath linen, bed blankets, bed linen, bedspreads, coverlets, covers for cushions, unfitted fabric furniture covers, curtains of textile or plastic, eiderdowns, namely, down coverlets; fabric for textile use, face towels of textile, textile handkerchiefs, household linen, knitted fabric, lingerie fabric, textile place mats, mattress covers, washing mitts, napkins of cloth for removing make-up, table napkins of textile, net curtains, pillow shams, pillowcases, quilts, fabric table runners, serviettes of textile, textile bed sheets, table cloths not of paper, table mats not of paper, mattress covers, ticks made of fabric, towels of textile, covers for eiderdowns | 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 17, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 7, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 27, 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. |
| Jan 2, 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. |
| Dec 13, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 13, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 9, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 3, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 16, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 10, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 10, 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. |
| Apr 14, 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 14, 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 27, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 20, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 16, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 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. |
| Sep 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. |
| Sep 13, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 23, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 28, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 28, 2005 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 28, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |