USPTO serial 74184144
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.
GERALD T. SHEKLETON
GERALD T SHEKLETON WELSH & KATZ, LTD135 S LASALLE STCHICAGO, IL 60603UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | electric motors | ABANDONED | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 2, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 27, 1997 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 27, 1997 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 11, 1996 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 11, 1996 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Apr 9, 1996 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Feb 15, 1996 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 7, 1995 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Aug 2, 1995 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| May 8, 1995 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Feb 23, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 22, 1994 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jul 22, 1994 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 19, 1994 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 29, 1994 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 24, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 19, 1993 | 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 5, 1993 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 28, 1993 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jul 16, 1993 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Sep 11, 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. |
| Jun 15, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 11, 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 13, 1991 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Nov 8, 1991 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |