USPTO serial 78796868
BACK-PACK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- NADELMAN, ANDREA KOYNER
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - 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 BACK-PACK?
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.
Beverly E. Hjorth
BEVERLY E HJORTH WEINGARTEN, SCHURGIN, GAGNEBIN & LEBOVIC10 POST OFFICE SQ STE 500SBOSTON, MA 02109-4607UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Interface electronics, namely, computer interface boards for controlling the charge and discharge of a rechargeable battery in a re-mountable package for use with a portable multimedia device | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 9, 2010 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Jan 17, 2008 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 16, 2008 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 15, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 13, 2007 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Sep 5, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 22, 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. |
| Feb 21, 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. |
| Jan 31, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 31, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 31, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 5, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 5, 2006 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Jul 5, 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. |
| Jun 29, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 27, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |