USPTO serial 74206894
DELUMPER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHUNG, SARAH
- 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 DELUMPER?
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.
Omri M. Behr
OMRI M BEHR BEHR & ADAMS325 PLERSON AVEEDISON, NJ 08837UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | cutting and sizing units, comprising shredding, chopping and/or crushing devices particularly used for size reduction of agglomerates for use in fluid pipelines | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 17, 1996 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 17, 1996 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 17, 1996 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Sep 14, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 8, 1995 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Apr 12, 1995 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 21, 1995 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 21, 1995 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 15, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 16, 1994 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Oct 29, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 7, 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. |
| Mar 18, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 15, 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 22, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 15, 1992 | 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. |
| Dec 30, 1991 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |