USPTO serial 78645668
CHICANO STYLE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- IN, SUNG HYUN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 CHICANO STYLE?
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
Santa Ana, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Andrew H. Simpson
ANDREW H SIMPSON KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR LLP2040 MAIN ST FL 14IRVINE, CA 92614-7216UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 018 | BAGS, NAMELY, DUFFEL BAGS, MESSENGER BAGS, CARGO BAGS, HANDBAGS, TOTE BAGS, SPORT BAGS; BACKPACKS; WALLETS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 31, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 12, 2007 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 11, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| May 2, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 1, 2007 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 1, 2007 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 25, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 25, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jan 25, 2007 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 25, 2007 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jul 25, 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 25, 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. |
| Jul 13, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 3, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 29, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 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. |
| Dec 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. |
| Dec 28, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 13, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |