USPTO serial 74682950
EASY CLEAN SYSTEM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FIRST, VIVIAN M
- 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 EASY CLEAN SYSTEM?
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
31100 Treviso, IT
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
HERBERT DUBNO
HERBERT DUBNO THE FIRM OF KARL F ROSS PC5676 RIVERDALE AVERIVERDALE (BRONX), NY 10471-0900UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | microwave ovens for cooking | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 23, 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. |
| Dec 9, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 28, 1998 | PC.D | PETITION TO DIRECTOR DISMISSED | — |
| Oct 28, 1998 | PC.D | PETITION TO DIRECTOR DISMISSED | — |
| Sep 5, 1997 | PCRC | PETITION TO DIRECTOR RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 5, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 10, 1997 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 14, 1997 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Feb 13, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 21, 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. |
| Jul 23, 1996 | 1.BD | Sec. 1(B) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| May 20, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 20, 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. |
| Nov 15, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |