USPTO serial 86353923
NEW MAN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- JUN, WON KYUNG WENDY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with NEW 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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Robert L. Epstein
ROBERT L. EPSTEIN EPSTEIN DRANGEL LLP60 E 42ND ST STE 2410NEW YORK, NY 10165-0011UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | tops and bottoms | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 17, 2019 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE E-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. |
| May 17, 2019 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2018 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 19, 2018 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 19, 2018 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 18, 2018 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 18, 2018 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 18, 2018 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 18, 2018 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 18, 2018 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 16, 2018 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 4, 2018 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2018 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2018 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 4, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 4, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 4, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 2, 2017 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 25, 2017 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 24, 2017 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 24, 2017 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 24, 2017 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 24, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 24, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 24, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 24, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 24, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 21, 2017 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 2, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 2, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 2, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 2, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 2, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 25, 2017 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 4, 2017 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 4, 2017 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 4, 2017 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 4, 2016 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 4, 2016 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 4, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 29, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 29, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 27, 2016 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 9, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 9, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 9, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 9, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 9, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 9, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 9, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 9, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 2, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 16, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 8, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 7, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 26, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 26, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 26, 2015 | 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 14, 2014 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Nov 14, 2014 | 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. |
| Nov 14, 2014 | 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 14, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 8, 2014 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Aug 4, 2014 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |