Drawing for HIGH PRODUCTIVITY SYSTEMS

USPTO serial 74133443

HIGH PRODUCTIVITY SYSTEMS

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 603
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
MICHOS, JOHN E
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 HIGH PRODUCTIVITY SYSTEMS?

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.

Felix L. D'Arienzo

FELIX L D'ARIENZO KENYON & KENYONONE BROADWAYNEW YORK, NY 10004UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
009computer hardware and software systems for use in software development in the field of computer-aided software engineering ("case") technology and toolsABANDONED—

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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Jun 15, 1994EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Jan 31, 1994ABN3ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Jan 31, 1994EXPAEX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED—
Jun 8, 1993CNESEXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED—
Feb 18, 1993CNCFCONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED—
Feb 17, 1993ZZZYPREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN—
Feb 11, 1993JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
May 1, 1992CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA 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.
Jan 24, 1992CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jul 18, 1991CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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 13, 1991DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
May 21, 1991DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance