USPTO serial 73625231
LUMINEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- TAYLOR, CRAIG
- 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 LUMINEX?
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.
HENRY W. LEEDS
HENRY W LEEDS BRYLAWSKI, CLEARY & LEEDS801 PENNSYLVANIA AVE S ESTE 201WASHINGTON, DC 20003Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | ELECTRONIC BREAKERS, SWITCHES, WIRES; PROGRAMMABLE ELECTRONICAL TIMERS CONTROLLED OR ELECTRONIC CLOCKS, WALL SOCKETS, STEOPHONIC RECEIVERS, TUNERS AND AMPLIFIERS, TAPE RECORDERS, TELEPHONES, TELEVISIONS, VIDEOCASSETTE RECORDERS, WORD PROCESSORS | ABANDONED | — |
| 011 | ELECTRIC FANS, HEATERS, LIGHT BULBS, LIGHTING FIXTURES, HUMIDIFIERS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 14, 1992 | 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 13, 1991 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 11, 1991 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 1991 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 27, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 20, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 2, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 18, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 19, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 25, 1989 | 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 16, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 4, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 2, 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. |
| Jan 22, 1987 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |