USPTO serial 78748445
REBEL CHILD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SAPP, HEATHER
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 REBEL CHILD?
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.
Robert A. Rosenbloum, Esq., Kristen L. Fancher, Esq.
Robert A. Rosenbloum, Esq., Kristen L. Fancher, Es GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP3290 NORTHSIDE PKWY NW STE 400ATLANTA, GA 30327-2268UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 018 | Luggage, namely suitcases, overnight bags, athletic bags, sport bags, beach bags, carry on bags, clutch bags, duffel bags, gym bags, overnight bags, school book bags, tote bags, garment bags for travel, carryall bags, traveling bags, hiking bags, backpacks, souvenir bags; cosmetic bags and toiletries bags sold empty, shaving bags sold empty; wallets; handbags, purses, coin purses, fanny packs; briefcases, satchels, briefcase type portfolios; cases for personal organizers and diaries; credit card cases; business card cases; luggage tags; umbrellas; beach umbrellas and golf umbrellas | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 17, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 16, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 24, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 24, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jul 15, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jul 15, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 7, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 16, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2008 | 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. |
| Sep 13, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 16, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 16, 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. |
| Jan 16, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 24, 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. |
| Oct 4, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 7, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 1, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 30, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 25, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 24, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 24, 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. |
| May 11, 2006 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 11, 2006 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 11, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 10, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |