USPTO serial 74395646
ADROIT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BELENKER, ESTHER
- 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 ADROIT?
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.
John C. Lenahan
JOHN C LENAHAN EVENSON, MCKEOWN, EDWARDS & LENAHAN1200 G ST NW STE 700WASHINGTON, DC 20005UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | computerware for use in manufacturing process control, manufacturing automation, and manufacturing plant-drive monitoring, namely computer hardware, software, peripherals, and user manuals sold as a unit therewith, applied in plant, industrial and manufacturing processes, featuring the facility of individual customization | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Dave Le Roux and Associates (Pty) Limited and Azon Controls (pty) Limited Partnership, The
- Other trademarks owned by Dave Le Roux and Associates (Pty) Limited and Azon Controls (pty) Limited Partnership, The
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Similar marks named ADROIT
- Prosecution event ABN6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 27, 1998 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Oct 24, 1997 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 26, 1997 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Apr 26, 1997 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 26, 1997 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Nov 20, 1996 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 25, 1996 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jun 14, 1996 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 22, 1996 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 26, 1995 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Jul 4, 1995 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Jun 2, 1995 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 14, 1995 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 30, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 6, 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. |
| Sep 7, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 7, 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. |
| Jan 18, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 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. |
| Sep 14, 1993 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 14, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |