USPTO serial 78745962
S
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SAPPENFIELD, ANN
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with S?
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.
Owner
Westlake Village, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Steven M. Weinberg, Esq.
Susan L. Heller, Esq. Greenberg Traurig, LLP2450 Colorado AvenueSuite 400ESanta Monica, CA 90404Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 020 | Figurines, works of art and models made of wood, wax, plaster or plastic, plastic license plate frames, sleeping bags, plastic bibs, plastic cake decorations, non-metal key chains, chair pads, deck chairs, non-metal money clips, corks for bottles, drinking straws, picture frames, pillows and seat cushions, booster seats, infant walkers, bassinets, high chairs, hand-held fans, decorative mobiles, and soft-sculpture wall decorations | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 1, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 6, 2006 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Dec 6, 2006 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| May 8, 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. |
| May 8, 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. |
| May 5, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 9, 2005 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Nov 8, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |