USPTO serial 74033263
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
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.
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
JOSEPH D. LEWIS
JOSEPH D LEWIS CLEARY & KOMEN600 PENNSYLVANIA AVE S EWASHINGTON, DC 20003UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | consulting services in the field of cost effectiveness of medications and development of patient package inserts for medications | ABANDONED | Jan 7, 1984 |
| 041 | consulting services in the field of patient education; educational services; namely, conducting lectures and seminars on the subjects of patient education, general health issues, prescription and non-prescription drugs, home diagnostic medical tests and disease | ABANDONED | Jan 7, 1984 |
| 042 | consulting and counseling services in the field of patient medication instruction aids, general health information, drug therapy, disease prevention and related public policy issues | ABANDONED | Jan 7, 1984 |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 29, 1996 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Nov 17, 1995 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Nov 17, 1995 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Jul 25, 1994 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 1994 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Oct 1, 1993 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 9, 1993 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Jun 4, 1993 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Apr 8, 1993 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jul 17, 1992 | 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 11, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 4, 1992 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 7, 1992 | NAUD | NOTICE OF UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - MAILED | — |
| Dec 11, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 7, 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. |
| Sep 17, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 19, 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. |
| Dec 20, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 20, 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. |
| Jun 12, 1990 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |