USPTO serial 78629219
POSTURE PERFECT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HICKEY,TONI
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 POSTURE PERFECT?
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.
Jill M. Pietrini, Esq.
JILL M PIETRINI ESQ MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS LLP11355 W OLYMPIC BLVDLOS ANGELES, CA 90064-1631UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Promoting public awareness of the benefits of posture and physical health, and the type of clothing designed to improve posture and physical health | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 4, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 25, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 27, 2007 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jun 27, 2007 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Mar 18, 2007 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 18, 2007 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 20, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 20, 2007 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Feb 5, 2007 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jan 30, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 24, 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. |
| Jul 24, 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. |
| Jun 18, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 19, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 19, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 10, 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. |
| Dec 10, 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. |
| Dec 8, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 9, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 26, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 26, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 20, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |