USPTO serial 73594911
BIOMEL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SUSSMAN, RONALD
- 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 BIOMEL?
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.
THOMAS W. FLYNN
THOMAS W FLYNN BIEBEL, FRENCH & NAUMAN2500 KETTERING TWRDAYTON, OH 45423UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | GLUCOSE TYROSINATE, SOLD AS AN INTEGRAL COMPONENT OF ULTRA VIOLET TANNING LOTIONS | ABANDONED | Mar 26, 1986 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 7, 1988 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Sep 16, 1988 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Sep 16, 1988 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Jul 11, 1988 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Apr 15, 1988 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Apr 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 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jul 17, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 24, 1987 | 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. |
| Jan 5, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 1, 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. |
| Jun 25, 1986 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |