USPTO serial 74683025
VORTECH FORCE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WINTER, ELIZABETH
- 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 VORTECH FORCE?
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
5, I 27020 Dorno, IT
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Richard C. Harris
ANTHONY P. VENTURINO NOVAK DRUCE CONNOLLY BOVE + QUIGG LLPEleventh Floor1875 EYE STREET, NWWASHINGTON, DC 20006Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | vacuum cleaners | ACTIVE | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 28, 2013 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 18, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 9, 2002 | 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. |
| Mar 6, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 18, 2001 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Apr 18, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 13, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 13, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 16, 1998 | 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. |
| Jun 5, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 8, 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. |
| Oct 22, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 22, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 30, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 26, 1996 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 15, 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 6, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |