USPTO serial 75100677
CARFINDER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RAUEN, JAMES
- 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 CARFINDER?
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.
Albert W. Hilburger
ALBERT W HILBURGER LAW OFFICE OF ALBERT W HILBURGER3 LAUREL HILL DR SNIANTIC, CT 06357UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | interactive video display system, namely, hardware being a CPU, a touch screen monitor, and software being a search and presentation program, vehicle databaes, multimedia databases in the form, variously, of photographs, audio and video graphics and animations, an optional decorative enclosure and, for maintenance purposes only, a keyboard and a mouse-type device, all for use by motor vehicle sales organizations to provide customers with information regarding features, pricing, services and other related information pertaining to the motor vehicles available for sale | ACTIVE | Sep 22, 1994 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 26, 2000 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Jun 8, 2000 | 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. |
| Apr 17, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 18, 2000 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 18, 2000 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 22, 1999 | 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. |
| Feb 1, 1999 | 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. |
| Jan 29, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 3, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 15, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 18, 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. |
| Nov 7, 1996 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |