USPTO serial 74145133
TCL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KAISER, THERESA
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with TCL?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
J. Timothy Hobbs
J TIMOTHY HOBBS POPHAM HAIK SCHNOBRICH & KAUFMAN655 15TH ST N WSTE 800WASHINGTON, DC 20005-5701Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | parts for motor cars; namely, rear wheel speed sensors, output shaft speed sensors, steering wheel angle sensors, throttle opening sensors, electronic engine governors, computers; systems comprising rear wheel speed sensors, an output shaft speed sensor, a steering wheel angle sensors, a throttle opening sensor, an engine governor and a computer which regulate engine power automatically according to driving and road surface conditions, sold as a unit | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 28, 1996 | 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. |
| Jun 12, 1996 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 30, 1995 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 27, 1995 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 28, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 28, 1994 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 1, 1994 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 8, 1993 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 18, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 14, 1993 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 24, 1993 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 30, 1993 | 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. |
| Apr 16, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 16, 1993 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 7, 1992 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 12, 1992 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 9, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 11, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 4, 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. |
| Jun 14, 1991 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |