USPTO serial 73469205
LINUS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CLARK, ROBERT C
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 LINUS?
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.
BERNICE E. SILVERMAN
BERNICE E SILVERMAN BURGESS, RYAN AND WAYNE370 LEXINGTON AVENEW YORK, NY 10017UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | SHOES, BOOTS, LACE-UP BOOTS, ATHLETIC SHOES, FABRIC UPPERS, WOMENS AND BABIES SHOES, INNER AND MIDDLE SOLES, SHOE HEELS | ABANDONED | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 4, 1990 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Jul 16, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 18, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 10, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 1, 1989 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 27, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 29, 1987 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 22, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 19, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 24, 1986 | 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 25, 1986 | 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. |
| Dec 11, 1985 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 18, 1985 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 7, 1985 | 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. |
| Apr 24, 1985 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 2, 1985 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 19, 1985 | 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. |
| Jul 17, 1984 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |