USPTO serial 74154391
UNIPLEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MANVILLE, ANNA W.
- 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 UNIPLEX?
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
Dedicated Microcomputers Limited
Pendlebury, Manchester M27 1DL, GB
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Kenneth I. Kohn
KENNETH I KOHN REISING, ETHINGTON, BARNARD, ET ALP O BOX 4390TROY, MI 48099UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | video camera monitoring systems, namely video multiplexer | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 16, 1995 | 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. |
| Aug 25, 1994 | 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. |
| Aug 9, 1994 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 6, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 10, 1993 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 18, 1992 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Dec 15, 1992 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Oct 20, 1992 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 23, 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. |
| Feb 25, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 23, 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. |
| Jul 31, 1991 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |