Status report
Get it in writing
The official USPTO status record for SAMSUNG, serial 77039970, as a dated PDF. One price, one document, delivered in about a minute.
INSTANT DELIVERY
Trademark Status Report
$7.99
The USPTO's own status record for this mark, on one dated page.
- Current status with a plain-English verdict
- Owner, classes, filing basis, and every key date
- The mark as it appears on the federal record
- Every prosecution event, filing to today
- Source-cited with the exact retrieval date
Built from the USPTO's TSDR record. Assignment chain of title and TTAB proceeding files sit in separate USPTO systems and are not included.
Preview
◆ TRADEMARKCHECKER.AITRADEMARK STATUS REPORT
SAMSUNGSerial 77039970 · Principal Register
Dead · Refused
Owner: SAMSUNG C&T CORPORATION
Class 035 - Advertising & Business
Class 036 - Insurance & Financial
Class 039 -
Class 041 - Education & Entertainment
Class 043 - Restaurant & Hotel Services
Class 044 - Medical & Beauty Services
Class 045 - Legal & Personal Services
Filed Nov 08, 2006
The record shows that the mark “SAMSUNG” was abandoned by Samsung C&T Corporation and is no longer active on the Principal Register. The abandoned application covered a wide range of services, including advertising and business services, insurance and financial services, transportation, education and entertainment, hospitality, medical and beauty services, and legal and personal services. Because the mark was never allowed, it does not give the owner control over the word in any of those areas, but the closest record‑based concern would arise if a new user offered services in one of those classes, especially advertising, insurance, or transportation. The prosecution history indicates that the applicant filed a Statement of Use and extensions but never filed a use statement, leading to abandonment. No opposition, cancellation, or court action appears in the supplied history, so there is no visible enforcement activity. For someone considering a similar name, the abandoned status means the mark is not protected, but using the same name in a similar service class could still raise concerns because the owner had previously sought protection.
Full event history, owner details, and verdict inside.
The way I'd use it, honestly, is as the thing you attach when a bank, a marketplace, or a co-founder asks "are we clear on the name". It answers in one page.