USPTO serial 73612025
SUPER VISION
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GLYNN, GERALD
- 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 SUPER VISION?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | COMPUTERIZED BUSINESS INFORMATION DISPLAY UNITS FOR USE IN THE STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL OF BUSINESS RECORDS AND NOT USED FOR SECURITY NOR SURVEILLANCE APPLICATIONS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 23, 1993 | 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. |
| Jan 4, 1993 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 1, 1992 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 17, 1992 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 26, 1991 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 10, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 11, 1991 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 7, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 15, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 6, 1989 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 2, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 30, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 13, 1988 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 20, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 14, 1987 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Apr 16, 1987 | 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 31, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 15, 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. |
| Oct 14, 1986 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |