USPTO serial 75171879
PARIETEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CASE, LEIGH CAROLINE
- 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 PARIETEX?
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
69400 VILLEFRANCHE SUR SAONE, FR
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
SHERIDAN NEIMARK
SHERIDAN NEIMARK BROWDY AND NEIMARK419 7TH ST NW STE 300WASHINGTON, DC 20004UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | implants, namely, bone implants, ganglion implants, gynecologic implants, vascular implants, neurologic implants, and orthopedic impants; surgical implants; prostheses, namely, bone prostheses, ganglion prostheses, vascular prostheses, gynecologic prostheses, neurologic prostheses, orthopedic prostheses, and prostheses for all body parts; parietal, visceral, and vascular prostheses; prosthetic ligaments; prosthetic tissues for parietal, visceral, and vascular use; and all products made from these tissues, namely, all of the above - identified goods | ABANDONED | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 26, 1999 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Nov 5, 1998 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 28, 1998 | 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. |
| Mar 6, 1998 | 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. |
| Jan 26, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 18, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 3, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 2, 1997 | 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. |
| Mar 25, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |