USPTO serial 78824179
NIVADA GRENCHEN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BLOHM, LINDA
- 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 NIVADA GRENCHEN?
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.
Max Moskowitz
MAX MOSKOWITZ OSTROLENK, FABER, GERB & SOFFEN LLP1180 AVE OF THE AMERICAS FL 7NEW YORK, NY 10036-8443UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 014 | Watches | ACTIVE | Jan 3, 2006 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 3, 2008 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Feb 25, 2008 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Feb 25, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 11, 2008 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Sep 26, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Sep 26, 2007 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Mar 30, 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. |
| Mar 29, 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. |
| Mar 29, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 29, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 29, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 29, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 22, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 14, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 14, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 10, 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. |
| Aug 10, 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. |
| Aug 10, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 6, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |