USPTO serial 74622318
Serial No. 74622318
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- —
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with Serial No. 74622318?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
WILLIAM B NASH
WILLIAM B NASH MILLER SISSON CHAPMAN & NASH PC300 CONVENT ST STE 1650SAN ANTONIO, TX 78205UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | container for perfumed dusting powder | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 26, 1998 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | 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. |
| Nov 10, 1997 | 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. |
| Aug 25, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 20, 1997 | 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 23, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 17, 1996 | 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. |
| May 31, 1996 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| May 24, 1996 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 20, 1996 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 1996 | 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 25, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 29, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 11, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 30, 1995 | 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 20, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 2, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |