Drawing for Serial No. 74254945

USPTO serial 74254945

Serial No. 74254945

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 603
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
DUBOIS, SUSAN L
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 Serial No. 74254945?

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.

Edward J. Kondracki

EDWARD J KONDRACKI KERKAM, STOWELL, KONDRACKI & CLARKE, PCTWO SKYLINE PL5203 LEESBURG PIKE, STE 600FALLS CHURCH, VA 22041

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
011seat and filter assembly for gas regulatorsABANDONEDMar 1, 1987

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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Nov 5, 1998JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Nov 4, 1998ABN3ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Nov 4, 1998EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Feb 19, 1998EXPAEX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED—
Aug 26, 1996CNESEXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED—
Jun 26, 1996JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Mar 19, 1996CNCFCONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED—
Mar 18, 1996ZZZXPREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN—
Mar 18, 1996DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Feb 29, 1996DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Feb 28, 1996JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Jan 30, 1996CNTAAPPROVED FOR REGISTRATION SUPPLEMENTAL REGISTER—
Nov 2, 1995JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Nov 1, 1995EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Apr 5, 1995CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA 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.
Dec 27, 1994CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jun 27, 1994CNRTNON-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 13, 1994CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Oct 13, 1993CNRTNON-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.
Jul 28, 1993CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Feb 10, 1993CNRTNON-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.
Dec 9, 1992CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jul 2, 1992CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jun 10, 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, 1992DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance