USPTO serial 79072661
FREEFLEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SETTLES LEWIS, SHAILA E
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 FREEFLEX?
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | Footwear in general, soles and heelpieces for shoes, footwear uppers, shoes, boots, sandals, slippers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 26, 2016 | DENA | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG MAILED | — |
| Nov 25, 2016 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Feb 6, 2015 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jun 26, 2011 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jun 9, 2011 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jun 7, 2011 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Mar 26, 2011 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Mar 3, 2011 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Mar 3, 2011 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jul 15, 2010 | NREP | NEW REPRESENTATIVE AT IB RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 7, 2010 | 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. |
| Jun 7, 2010 | 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. |
| Dec 5, 2009 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Nov 9, 2009 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Nov 9, 2009 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| Nov 9, 2009 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Nov 6, 2009 | 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 4, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 17, 2009 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Oct 13, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Oct 2, 2009 | LIMS | LIMITATION OF GOODS/SERVICES FROM IB ENTERED | — |
| Oct 1, 2009 | SDRC | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A SUBSEQ DESIG FROM IB | — |