USPTO serial 78801290
BTN+
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MORRIS, KRISTINA KLOIBER
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 BTN+?
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
North Las Vegas, NV
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Richard C. Gilmore
RICHARD C GILMORE Maschoff Brennan Laycock Gilmore Israelsen & Wrigh111 S. Main StreetSuite 600Salt Lake City, UT 84111Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | Fertilizers; Soil additives; Soil amendments | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2018 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 28, 2008 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 23, 2008 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 22, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 14, 2007 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Sep 17, 2007 | GEA1 | NOTIFICATION OF ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2007 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2007 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 17, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 17, 2007 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 17, 2007 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Aug 16, 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. |
| Feb 16, 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. |
| Feb 16, 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 23, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 22, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 22, 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. |
| Jul 20, 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. |
| Jul 20, 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. |
| Jul 18, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 17, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 2, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |