USPTO serial 78600160
BOARD DAUGHTERS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BRECKENFELD, WILLIAM G
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116
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 BOARD DAUGHTERS?
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
Sherman Oaks, CA
Sherman Oaks, CA
Sherman Oaks, CA
Sherman Oaks, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jenifer deWolf Paine
Jenifer deWolf Paine PROSKAUER ROSE LLP1585 BroadwayTrademark File RoomNEW YORK, NY 10036-8299Goods 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.
- Other trademarks owned by PERRY, GAIL C.
- Other trademarks owned by Nathanson, Daniel
- Other trademarks owned by Nathanson, Daniel
- Other trademarks owned by Bishop, Richard
- Other trademarks owned by Bishop, Richard
- Other trademarks in Class 016
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Other trademarks in Class 041
- Similar marks named BOARD DAUGHTERS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 18, 2008 | 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. |
| Jun 18, 2008 | 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 24, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 24, 2007 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Oct 17, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2007 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 17, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 17, 2007 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 19, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 3, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Apr 3, 2007 | 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 8, 2006 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Oct 17, 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 25, 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. |
| Jul 5, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 9, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 26, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 22, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 22, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| May 22, 2006 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| May 22, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| May 11, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 1, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 1, 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. |
| Oct 29, 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. |
| Oct 29, 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. |
| Oct 28, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 8, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |