USPTO serial 78746438
SHIZNIT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HAYES, GINA CLARK
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 SHIZNIT?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Howard N. Flaxman
HOWARD N FLAXMAN WELSH & FLAXMAN LLC2000 DUKE ST STE 100ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314-6101UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Electronic audio and video entertainment systems for vehicles, namely, overhead, in-seat and in-console systems comprised of video displays, audio speakers, receivers, disc players, and/or video game players | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 6, 2007 | 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. |
| Aug 6, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 8, 2007 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| Jan 5, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 11, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 11, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 11, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 15, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 2, 2006 | NAUD | NOTICE OF UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - MAILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2006 | NAUD | REPORT UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 11, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 9, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 9, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 16, 2006 | CEPE | COMBINED EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY ACTION ENTERED | — |
| May 15, 2006 | CEAP | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | — |
| May 15, 2006 | CPEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT AND/OR PRIORITY ACTION - COMPLETED | — |
| May 9, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 8, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |