USPTO serial 73772268
ERIEYE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WILLIAMS, IRENE
- 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 ERIEYE?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
ADRIENNE L. WHITE
ADRIENNE L WHITE BURNS, DOANE, SWECKER & MATHISWASHINGTON & PRINCE STSTHE GEORGE MASON BLDG P O BOX 1404ALEXANDRIA, VA 22313-1404Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | RADAR TO DETECT ONCOMING AIRBORNES | 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 18, 1995 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| May 16, 1995 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| May 16, 1995 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| May 16, 1995 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 4, 1995 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Feb 23, 1995 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 23, 1995 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 23, 1995 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 27, 1992 | 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. |
| Aug 5, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 2, 1991 | 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. |
| Feb 14, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 16, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 17, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 31, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 14, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 15, 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. |
| Feb 28, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |