Drawing for ARMEX

USPTO serial 74254481

ARMEX

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 614
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
DELANEY, ZHALEH SYBIL
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 ARMEX?

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.

Lawrence E. Abelman

LAWRENCE E ABELMAN ABELMAN FRAYNE & SCHWAB708 THIRD AVENEW YORK, NY 10017-4141UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
002coating compositions used to inhibit corrosion and rustABANDONED—
003purpose cleaning preparations for industrial and household useABANDONED—
007machines which dispense all purpose cleaning preparations, degreasing preparations and paint stripping and removing compositions; abrasive blasting and delivery systems and abrasive blasting containment systems composed of container units, hose and nozzle for emitting air, water and all purpose cleaning, degreasing and paint stripping preparations; valves controllers and parts thereforABANDONED—

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

Latest event (ABN2): 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.

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Feb 16, 1994ABN2ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSEThe 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.
Feb 14, 1994PETDPETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED—
May 27, 1993PETRPETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED—
Nov 24, 1992CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
Oct 22, 1992CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Oct 19, 1992CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
May 21, 1992CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
Apr 30, 1992DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance