USPTO serial 73830097
VANTAGE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- —
- 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 VANTAGE?
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
POINTE CLAIRE, QUEBEC, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
NORM D. ST. LANDAU
TUCKER, FLYER, SANGER, & LEWISNORM D ST LANDAU1615 L ST N W - STE 400WASHINGTON, DC 20036-5601Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 008 | HAND TOOLS FOR INDUSTRIAL AND HOUSEHOLD USE, NAMELY, BITS, BLADES, BOLT CUTTERS, CENTER PUNCHES, CHISELS, CLAMPS, CUTTERS, DRILLS, FLARING TOOLS, GEAR PULLERS, GRINDING WHEELS, HACKSAWS, HAMMERS, HEX KEYS, INSERT BITS, MALLETS, NAILSETS, NUT DRIVERS, PLIERS, PRY BARS, SABER SAW BLADES, SAWS, SCREWDRIVERS, SOCKETS AND ATTACHMENTS, TAPS AND DIES, UTILITY KNIVES, VISES, WRENCHES, WOOD BITS AND WOOD HANDLES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 23, 1992 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Dec 8, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 8, 1992 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 28, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 5, 1992 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 23, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 19, 1992 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 29, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 10, 1992 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 20, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 12, 1992 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 12, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 5, 1991 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 15, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 22, 1991 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 17, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 26, 1990 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Aug 3, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 28, 1990 | 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 8, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 11, 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. |