USPTO serial 75360252
POLYFUSE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- THAYER, GARY
- 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 POLYFUSE?
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
58453 Witten, DE
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | electrical devices and equipment, namely, miniature fuse-links as well as fuse-holders and caps thereof, subminiature fuse-links as well as fuse-holders and caps thereof, thin-film fuses, thermal-links and temperature switches for over temperature protection, telecommunication fuses as well as fuse-holders and caps thereof, surge arresters with supports, varistors and components for over-voltage protection, thermistors, low voltage fuse-links, quick-acting semiconductor fuse-links, high voltage fuse-links and fuse-bases, valve type lightning arresters, namely, low voltage lightning arresters and medium voltage lightning arresters | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 29, 2002 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Aug 31, 2001 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 17, 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 16, 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. |
| Aug 24, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 24, 1998 | 1.BD | Sec. 1(B) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Jun 5, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 16, 1998 | LOPT | LETTER OF PROTEST EVIDENCE FORWARDED | — |
| Feb 25, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 13, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |