USPTO serial 73472335
SENTINEL 424
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- TINGLEY, JOHN
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 SENTINEL 424?
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.
Owner
ROCHELLE PARK, NJ
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
ROBERT B.G. HOROWITZ
ESLINGER & PELTON, PC522 FIFTH AVENEW YORK, NY 10036UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | ELECTRICAL NETWORK MANAGEMENT CONCENTRATOR WHICH CONTINUOUSLY MONITORS AND CONTROLS DATA COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS AND DEVICES WHICH RESPOND TO ASCII (AMERICAN STNDARD CODE FOR INFORMATION INTERCHANGE) CHARACTERS OR RAISE OR DROP A STANDARD ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION VOLTAGE (POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE) OR CLOSE AN ELECTRICAL CONTACT | ABANDONED | Dec 1, 1983 |
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 29, 1986 | 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. |
| Feb 28, 1986 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Feb 13, 1986 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Feb 13, 1986 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jan 22, 1986 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Dec 9, 1985 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 28, 1985 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Apr 22, 1985 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Mar 11, 1985 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 7, 1984 | 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. |