USPTO serial 73745572
POSTURE-LASTIC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LORENZO, ROBERT
- 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 POSTURE-LASTIC?
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
GREENFIELD, OLDHAM, GB
GREENFIELD, OLDHAM OL3 7DR, GB
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
DAVID O JOHANSON
DAVID O JOHANSON BINGHAM DANA & GOULD LLP150 FEDERAL STBOSTON, MA 02110UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 020 | METAL SPRINGS AND ASSEMBLAGES OF SPRINGS FOR INCORPORATION IN MATTRESSES AND UPHOLSTERED FURNITURE; FURNITURE, MATTRESSES, MATRESS BASES, DIVANS BEDDING EXCLUDING LINIEN PILLOWS, BOLSTERS AND CUSHIONS | 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 23, 1998 | 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. |
| Nov 18, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 17, 1998 | 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 11, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 20, 1997 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 3, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 9, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 4, 1996 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 18, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 12, 1995 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 10, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 18, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 23, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 23, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 11, 1994 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 19, 1994 | 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 19, 1994 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 14, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 10, 1994 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 1994 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 10, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 27, 1993 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 26, 1993 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 12, 1993 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 7, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 3, 1992 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 27, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 29, 1991 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 22, 1991 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 25, 1991 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 18, 1991 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 13, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 13, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 11, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 6, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 18, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 10, 1989 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 5, 1988 | ZZZZ | ALLOWANCE/COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Sep 27, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 27, 1988 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 1988 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |