USPTO serial 73739652
OPTONET
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ERSKINE KATHRYN
- 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 OPTONET?
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
MARLY LE ROI, FR
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
B. PARKER LIVINGSTON, JR.
B PARKER LIVINGSTON JR MASON, FENWICK & LAWRENCESTE 10001225 EYE ST N WWASHINGTON, DC 20005Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | MULTIPLE SENSOR SYSTEM, COMPRISING A CENTRAL COMPONENT AND A NUMBER OF SENSORS DISTRIBUTED OR MULTIPLEXED ON ONE OR SEVERAL FIBER OPTIC LINKS AND ARRANGED IN A COMBINATION OF A STAR AND DAISY CHAIN CONFIGURATION FOR USE ON OIL RIGGS, INDUSTRIAL, EXPERIMENTAL OR NUCLEAR PLANTS OR IN LAND, SEA OR AEROSPACE VEHICLES FOR SURVEILLANCE, SAFETY OR AS A FEEDBACK FOR ACTUATOR SYSTEMS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 12, 1991 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Feb 12, 1991 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 12, 1991 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| May 18, 1990 | 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. |
| May 16, 1990 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 2, 1990 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Apr 26, 1990 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Dec 29, 1989 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Nov 24, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 24, 1989 | 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. |
| Mar 27, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 27, 1988 | 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. |
| Sep 1, 1988 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |