USPTO serial 73783165
PACE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LEE, SUSAN
- 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 PACE?
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.
AUGUST E. ROEHRIG, JR.
AUGUST E ROEHRIG JR WALL AND ROEHRIG217 MONTGOMERY ST710 HILLS BLDGSYRACUSE, NY 13202Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 020 | BATHROOM WOODEN CABINETRY - NAMELY, VANITIES, MEDICINE CABINETS WITH MIRRORS, STOOLS, MAKE-UP TABLES, AND CLOTHES HAMPERS | ABANDONED | Jan 14, 1980 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 2, 1992 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 11, 1992 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Feb 11, 1992 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Nov 27, 1991 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 9, 1991 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 30, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 5, 1991 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| May 17, 1991 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 28, 1991 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Feb 27, 1991 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 22, 1991 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 22, 1991 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 29, 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. |
| Oct 29, 1990 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Aug 20, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 28, 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. |
| Feb 6, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 4, 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. |
| Apr 25, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |