USPTO serial 74207792
SUNGLANCE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SZOKE, MICHAEL
- 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 SUNGLANCE?
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.
Charles N. Quinn
CHARLES N QUINN DANN, DORFMAN, HERRELL & SKILLMAN1601 MARKET STPHILADELPHIA, PA 19103UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | cleaning solutions and chemically treated fabric and/or paper materials, for cleaning eyeglasses | ABANDONED | — |
| 009 | eyewear; namely, eyeglasses, contact lenses and eyewear accessories; namely, eyeglass cases, nosepieces, cushions for nosepieces, neckstraps and replacement parts for eyeglasses | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 28, 1995 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Sep 26, 1995 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Aug 1, 1995 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 4, 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. |
| Mar 31, 1994 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 14, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 7, 1993 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 9, 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. |
| Jun 17, 1993 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 17, 1993 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Apr 5, 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. |
| Feb 18, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 13, 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 8, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 3, 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. |
| Dec 3, 1991 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |