USPTO serial 74092227
BRIGHT EYE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DUNN, ELIZABETH A
- 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 BRIGHT EYE?
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.
Philip G. Hampton, II
PHILIP G HAMPTON II KENYON & KENYON1025 CONNECTICUT AVE N WWASHINGTON, DC 20036UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | hand held lights, battery-powered comdination keyring/flashlights; namely, keyring lights | ABANDONED | Sep 1, 1990 |
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 16, 1994 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Nov 9, 1994 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jul 26, 1994 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jul 26, 1994 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Jul 19, 1993 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Nov 5, 1992 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Sep 17, 1992 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 3, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 2, 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. |
| Mar 18, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 12, 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. |
| Nov 25, 1991 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Oct 25, 1991 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 27, 1991 | 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. |
| Aug 27, 1991 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jul 29, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 29, 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. |
| Jan 16, 1991 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |