USPTO serial 74800429
TELENEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 605
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ROSENBURGH, ELISSA
- 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 TELENEX?
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
S-402 76 Goteborg, SE
S-402 76 Goteborg, SE
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
ERNEST A. BEUTLER
ERNEST A BEUTLER HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCEP O BOX 828BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48013UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | wireless security alarms | ABANDONED | Jan 1, 1987 |
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 15, 1992 | ABN5 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 14, 1992 | 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. |
| Mar 13, 1992 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 8, 1992 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Feb 26, 1991 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 12, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 9, 1990 | 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. |
| Apr 6, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 11, 1990 | 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 8, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 5, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 24, 1989 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jul 31, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 30, 1989 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 13, 1989 | 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. |
| Feb 7, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 17, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |