USPTO serial 85192335
THE TWIG
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KEARNEY, COLLEEN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 113 - 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 THE TWIG?
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
Los Angeles, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Thomas I. Rozsa
THOMAS I ROZSA ROZSA LAW GROUP LC18757 BURBANK BLVDSUITE 220TARZANA, CA 91356-3346Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | HEADSETS FOR MOBILE TELEPHONES, MP3 PLAYERS AND MP4 PLAYERS | ACTIVE | Mar 20, 2010 |
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 11, 2013 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 4, 2013 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 4, 2013 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 17, 2012 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Apr 30, 2012 | RBFT | REPLY BRIEF FILED - CHECK TTAB FILES | — |
| Apr 10, 2012 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Apr 9, 2012 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 21, 2012 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Dec 21, 2011 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Dec 21, 2011 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jun 23, 2011 | 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. |
| Jun 22, 2011 | 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. |
| Jun 1, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 31, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 31, 2011 | 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. |
| Mar 14, 2011 | 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. |
| Mar 11, 2011 | 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. |
| Mar 11, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 10, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Dec 10, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |