USPTO serial 78773844
PRAIRIE BEVEL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DUBOIS, SUSAN L
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 111 - 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 PRAIRIE BEVEL?
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
Klamath Falls, OR
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Mark C. Dukes, Craig N. Killen, Goran P. Stojkovich, Jeremy C. Whitley, Lucas V. Haugh, Charles G. Zug
Mark C. Dukes Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP1320 Main Street17th FloorColumbia, SC 29201Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | decorative glass panels sold as an integral component of metal doors | 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 24, 2008 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 23, 2008 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 8, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 24, 2008 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | GNSN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS STATEMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | GNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 27, 2007 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Sep 27, 2007 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 4, 2007 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 20, 2007 | GEA1 | NOTIFICATION OF ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 20, 2007 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 20, 2007 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 12, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 12, 2007 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 12, 2007 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jun 11, 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. |
| Dec 12, 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. |
| Dec 12, 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. |
| Nov 28, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 28, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 28, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 2, 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 10, 2006 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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 10, 2006 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| May 3, 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 3, 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 2, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 20, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |