USPTO serial 73661962
POLYMER-GRANITE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- COLE RICHARD G
- 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 POLYMER-GRANITE?
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
MONTREAL, QUEBEC, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
RICHARD A. FLYNT
RICHARD A FLYNT ROYLANCE, ABRAMS BERDO & GOODMAN1225 CONNECTICUT AVE N WWASHINGTON, DC 20036-2680UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 019 | BUILDING MATERIALS - NAMELY, TILES, PAVING STONES, ROOF TILES, RIGID CLADDING, WALL PANELLING, FASCIA PANELS, CURTAIN WALLS, STAIR TREADS, PATIO STONES, BRICKS, BLOCKS, PANELS, PARTITIONS; MOLDED PRODUCTS - NAMELY, MEDIAN BARRIERS; BASES FOR SUPPORTING MACHINE TOOLS, PUMPS, LASERS, INSTRUMENTS AND PRINTING PRESSES; LAMP STANDARDS, CURBS, GUTTERS, AND RAILROAD CROSSING INSERTS | ABANDONED | — |
| 020 | FURNITURE FACING SHEETS, OUTDOOR FURNITURE, COUNTERTOPS, TABLE TOPS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 16, 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. |
| Mar 2, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 18, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 22, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 3, 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. |
| Dec 9, 1988 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 6, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 26, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 4, 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. |