USPTO serial 75040253
PHANTOM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MCMORROW, JANICE LEE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 PHANTOM?
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
Oundle, Peterborough PE8 5PA, GB
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Wm. Marshall Lee
THOMAS E SMITH BARNES & THORNBURGPO BOX 2786CHICAGO, IL 60690-2786UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 012 | power boats and power boat hulls | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 8, 2008 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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 8, 2008 | 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. |
| May 12, 2008 | GNS1 | NOTIFICATION OF SUBSEQUENT FINAL EMAILED | — |
| May 12, 2008 | GNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | — |
| May 12, 2008 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 18, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 19, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 18, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 18, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 26, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 8, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 5, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 2, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 8, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 26, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 20, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 23, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 27, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 24, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 30, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 8, 1997 | 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. |
| Dec 20, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 22, 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. |
| Jun 20, 1996 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |