Dual purpose floor mat
Wildstein , et al. December 16, 2
U.S. patent number D483,596 [Application Number D/173,216] was granted by the patent office on 2003-12-16 for dual purpose floor mat. This patent grant is currently assigned to Apache Mills, Inc.. Invention is credited to Samuel Collins Weems, Arthur Samuel Wildstein.
| United States Patent | D483,596 |
| Wildstein , et al. | December 16, 2003 |
Dual purpose floor mat
Claims
The ornamental design for a dual purpose floor mat, as shown and described.
| Inventors: | Wildstein; Arthur Samuel (Marietta, GA), Weems; Samuel Collins (Calhoun, GA) |
|---|---|
| Assignee: | Apache Mills, Inc. (Calhoun,
GA) |
| Appl. No.: | D/173,216 |
| Filed: | December 23, 2002 |
| Current U.S. Class: | D6/582 |
| Current International Class: | 0611 |
| Field of Search: | ;D6/582-585 ;15/215-217 ;428/85,92 |
References Cited [Referenced By]
U.S. Patent Documents
| D96870 | September 1935 | Strobel |
| D179858 | March 1957 | Moor |
| D356228 | March 1995 | Sano |
| D465375 | November 2002 | Fernando |
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Haynes; Michael N.
Description
FIG. 1 is a top view of a dual purpose floor mat showing our new design.
* * * * *
uspto.report is an independent third-party trademark research tool that is not affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or any other governmental organization. The information provided by uspto.report is based on publicly available data at the time of writing and is intended for informational purposes only.
While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information displayed on this site. The use of this site is at your own risk. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.
All official trademark data, including owner information, should be verified by visiting the official USPTO website at www.uspto.gov. This site is not intended to replace professional legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for consulting with a legal professional who is knowledgeable about trademark law.
| 