USPTO serial 73568360
MEWTEC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FINE, STEVEN
- 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 MEWTEC?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
ROBERT G. MCMORROW
ROBERT G MCMORROW SUGHRUE, MION, ZINN, MACPEAK & SEAS1776 K ST N WWASHINGTON, DC 20006-2359UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | ELECTRIC AIR CIRCULATORS, ELECTRIC FLOOR HEATERS, ELECTRIC FACE STEAMERS, WATER FILTERS PRIMARILY FOR DOMESTIC USE, AND HAIR DRYERS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23, 1991 | 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. |
| Jun 4, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 21, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 7, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 18, 1989 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 17, 1988 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Jun 6, 1988 | 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. |
| Sep 10, 1987 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 4, 1987 | ZZZZ | ALLOWANCE/COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Dec 23, 1986 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 23, 1986 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Dec 17, 1986 | ZZZZ | ALLOWANCE/COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Dec 2, 1986 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jul 9, 1986 | 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. |
| May 12, 1986 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 21, 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. |
| Jan 7, 1986 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |