USPTO serial 78852145
PATRIOT BRANDS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHANG, KATHERINE S
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 PATRIOT BRANDS?
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
Sleepy Hollow, NY
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jay Begler
Jay H. Begler Nixon Peabody LLP401 Ninth Street, N.W.Suite 900Washington, DC 20004Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Business marketing consulting services, namely, consulting with United States and foreign companies that market local brands to compete more effectively with international and global brands | 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 1, 2008 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Sep 29, 2008 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Sep 29, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 12, 2008 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Apr 1, 2008 | GEA1 | NOTIFICATION OF ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 1, 2008 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 1, 2008 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 8, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 8, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 3, 2007 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 3, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Dec 3, 2007 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Dec 3, 2007 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Nov 2, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 5, 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. |
| Jun 5, 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. |
| May 18, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 15, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 10, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 10, 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. |
| May 10, 2007 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| May 10, 2007 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 16, 2007 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Mar 16, 2007 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Mar 15, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 14, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 14, 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. |
| Sep 12, 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. |
| Sep 12, 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 17, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 6, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |