USPTO serial 78795622
X
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHARLON, BARNEY
- 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 X?
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
Midwest City, OK
Midwest City, OK
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Michael J. LaBrie
MICHAEL J LABRIE MCAFEE & TAFT10TH FLOOR-TWO LEADERSHIP SQ211 N ROBINSONOKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73102Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 020 | table tops, namely, display tables, worktops, worksurfaces; frames, namely, picture frames not of precious metal, picture frames of precious metal, mirror frames, leather picture frames, paper picture frames; collectibles, namely, desktop statuary and figurines made of plaster, plastic, wax, wood, non-metal and non-leather key chains, non-metal dog tags, plaques of plastic, wax, wood, plastic key rings, plastic key chain tags, collectible pillows, plastic novelty license plates, collectible seat cushions, statues of plaster, plastic, wax, wood | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 27, 2008 | 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. |
| Oct 27, 2008 | 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. |
| Mar 11, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 18, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 28, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 15, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 15, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 12, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 28, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 28, 2007 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 28, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 28, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 7, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 7, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 7, 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. |
| Mar 8, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 8, 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. |
| Feb 16, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 16, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 16, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 22, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 18, 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. |
| Jul 18, 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. |
| Jul 11, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 27, 2006 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |