USPTO serial 75271522
MILLIFLEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GLEMBOCKI, ERICA
- 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 MILLIFLEX?
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
91210 DRAVEIL, FR
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
ROLAND PLOTTEL
P O BOX 293NEW YORK, NY 10185UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | multipair cables for telephone company installations; telephone cables for switching transmission systems and for indoor telecommunications networks; coaxial cables; multicoaxial cables; multitwincoaxial cables | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 11, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 23, 2000 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Feb 23, 2000 | EXDM | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED AS MOOT | — |
| Apr 2, 1999 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jan 29, 1999 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jan 12, 1999 | PCRC | PETITION TO DIRECTOR RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 6, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 13, 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. |
| May 14, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 19, 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. |
| Nov 4, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |