Drawing for MAXX

USPTO serial 75162108

MAXX

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 603
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
FRONT, MITCHELL
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 MAXX?

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.

WALTER D AMES

6718 WEMBERLY WAYMC LEAN, VA 22101-1530UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
006self-piercing and self-drilling metal screws for use in the manufacture of metal and post-frame buildingsACTIVEJul 7, 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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Oct 25, 2004MAB3ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Sep 10, 2004EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Sep 10, 2004EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Sep 1, 2004CFITCASE FILE IN TICRS—
Jun 8, 2004ABN3ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Jun 8, 2004EXPAEX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED—
Jul 25, 2003CNESEXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED—
May 28, 2003JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Feb 11, 2003CNCFCONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED—
Dec 5, 2002MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Dec 4, 2002CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jun 6, 2002CNCFCONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED—
Feb 6, 2002JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Feb 6, 2002EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Jan 8, 2002CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jul 31, 2001CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA 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.
Feb 23, 2001CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Aug 23, 2000CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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 22, 2000DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Jun 30, 2000CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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 26, 2000CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Sep 16, 1997CNSLLETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED—
Sep 4, 1997CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Mar 24, 1997CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
Mar 22, 1997DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Mar 10, 1997DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Feb 24, 1997DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Feb 21, 1997DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance