USPTO serial 73584078
MICROL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ERSKINE KATHRYN
- 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 MICROL?
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.
MICHAEL L. MAU
MICHAEL L MAU MERCHANT, GOULD, SMITH, EDELL, ET AL1000 NORWEST CTRSAINT PAUL, MN 55101UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | ELECTRONIC CONTROL INSTRUMENTATION AND FIELD TRANSMITTERS, NAMELY, SWITCH MODE POWER SUPPLIES; ALARM ANNUNCIATORS; DATA LOGGERS/SEQUENTIAL EVENT RECORDERS; FIELD AND RACK MOUNT TWO WIRE TRANSMITTERS; ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS COMPRISING POWER SUPPLIES, MICROPROCESSOR CONTROLS, SOFTWARE, REMOTE CONTROLLER AND DATA ACQUISITION UNITS; TEMPERATURE MONITORS AND CONTROLLERS; AND VIBRATION DETECTION APPARATUS; ELECTRONIC FLUORESCENT BALLASTS FOR THE CONTROL AND OPERATION OF FLUORESCENT GAS DISCHARGE LAMPS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 12, 1990 | 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. |
| Nov 27, 1989 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 2, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 15, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 17, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 12, 1989 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 25, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 26, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 7, 1988 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 5, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 3, 1987 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 13, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 2, 1987 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 21, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 6, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 12, 1987 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 11, 1986 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 18, 1986 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 20, 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. |
| Apr 28, 1986 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |