USPTO serial 74625337
ERGONOMICZ
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GREENBAUM, CINDY BETH
- 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 ERGONOMICZ?
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.
Barry E. Engel
BARRY E ENGEL VINSON & ELKINS LLP2300 FIRST CITY TWR 1001 FANNINHOUSTON, TX 77002-6760UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | ergonomically designed factory and warehouse work station equipment and material handling equipment | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 31, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 25, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 21, 1997 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 20, 1997 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 7, 1997 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 8, 1997 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Dec 6, 1996 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Nov 7, 1996 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 12, 1996 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 1, 1996 | 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. |
| Jan 29, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 24, 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 30, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 24, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 8, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |