USPTO serial 79006175
YOUNG MAN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- REIHNER, DAVID
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 111 - 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 YOUNG MAN?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 012 | Cars, trucks, engines for land vehicles, vehicle seats, cable cars, handcarts for handling goods, sleighs, vehicles, namely, motorized golf carts, tires for vehicle wheels | SECTION 70 - CANCELLED | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 14, 2015 | DENA | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG MAILED | — |
| Feb 13, 2015 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Oct 2, 2014 | NREP | NEW REPRESENTATIVE AT IB RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 17, 2007 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jul 6, 2007 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jul 6, 2007 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Nov 23, 2006 | CHLD | CHANGE OF OWNER RECEIVED FROM IB | — |
| Aug 3, 2006 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jul 13, 2006 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jul 12, 2006 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jul 3, 2006 | 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. |
| Jul 3, 2006 | 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. |
| May 18, 2006 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Apr 28, 2006 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Apr 28, 2006 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Nov 30, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 30, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 30, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 23, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 23, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 23, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Nov 23, 2005 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 8, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 8, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 12, 2005 | 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. |
| Oct 12, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 28, 2005 | RFNP | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Mar 4, 2005 | 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. |
| Feb 28, 2005 | 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. |
| Feb 28, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 3, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| Nov 29, 2004 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |