USPTO serial 75095740
MICRO-TEC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DUNN, ELIZABETH A
- 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 MICRO-TEC?
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.
DOUGLAS W SPRINKLE
DOUGLAS W SPRINKLE GIFFORD KRASS GROH SPRINKLE ET AL280 N WOODWARD STE 400BIRMINGHAM, MI 48009UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 040 | applying protective coatings to metal | ACTIVE | Aug 12, 1992 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 6, 1999 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 6, 1999 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 23, 1999 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 23, 1999 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Feb 9, 1998 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Dec 9, 1997 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Nov 19, 1997 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Nov 5, 1997 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Sep 29, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 30, 1997 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| May 23, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 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. |
| Mar 13, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 11, 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. |
| Aug 27, 1996 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |