Get it in writing
The official USPTO status record for THE MARK, "AFTER-LIGHT" CONSISTS OF STANDARD CHARACTERS WITHOUT CLAIM TO ANY PARTICULAR FONT, STYLE, SIZE, OR COLOR. THE WORD SPELLS "AFTER" WITH CONTAINS NO CLAIMS TO STYLE, SIZE OR SPECIFIC COLOR. A HYPHEN IS DIRECTLY SUCCEEDING THE WORD AFTER AND MAKES NO CLAIM TO SPECIFIC FONT, STYLE OR SIZE. THE WORD "LIGHT" IS AFTER THE STANDARD HYPHEN IN NO STYLIZED FONT, COLOR OR SIZE. THE FULL MARK SPELLED IS "AFTER-LIGHT" WITH NO STYLIZED FONT, COLOR OR SIZE., serial 85488041, as a dated PDF. One price, one document, delivered in about a minute.
Trademark Status Report
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.
Serial 85488041 · Principal Register
Dead · Refused
Owner: Blue Wolf Enterprises, Inc.
Class 009 - Electrical & Scientific Apparatus
Class 011 -
Filed
The record shows the application for “AFTER‑LIGHT” is dead, having been refused and voided because it never met the minimum filing date requirements, with the last status entry dated Jan 18 2012 and the owner listed as Blue Wolf Enterprises, Inc., an Idaho corporation; the mark never reached registration on either the Principal or Supplemental Register. The filing covered two classes: Class 009 for electric light dimmers, LED and HID light controls, and portable LED safety lighting devices, and Class 011 for electric night lights and portable battery‑operated lights meant for use where other light sources are unavailable. Because the goods are limited to lighting hardware, a similar name used on unrelated products—say clothing or software—would be farther from the scope shown here, though the record does not give the owner control over every possible use of the words “after‑light.” The prosecution history only notes the entry of the new application in early December 2011 and its subsequent refusal; no oppositions, cancellations or court actions appear, so the supplied history shows no enforcement activity. I'd treat this as a modest concern if you plan a lighting‑related brand with the same wording, but the risk drops sharply for dissimilar goods.
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.