USPTO serial 78571687
AIRREST
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RIRIE, VERNA BETH
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 104 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 AIRREST?
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.
Kristin Jordan Harkins
KRISTIN JORDAN HARKINS CONLEY ROSE PC5700 GRANITE PKWY STE 330PLANO, TX 75024-6623UNITED 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 12, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 6, 2007 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 6, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 12, 2007 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Nov 25, 2006 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 25, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 3, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Nov 3, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 30, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 27, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 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. |
| Apr 27, 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. |
| Apr 27, 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. |
| Apr 5, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 27, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 22, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 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. |
| Sep 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. |
| Sep 15, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 2, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |