USPTO serial 75377494
HOW A POWER CHAIR SHOULD FEEL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHARLON, BARNEY
- 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 HOW A POWER CHAIR SHOULD FEEL?
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.
Charles N. Quinn
CHARLES N QUINN FOX, ROTHSCIHILD, O'BRIEN & FRANKEL LLP2000 MARKET ST FL 10PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103-3291UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 012 | powered wheelchairs and powered chair bases for use principally by elderly, infirm or disabled persons | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 30, 2001 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 13, 2001 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jun 13, 2001 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Feb 26, 2001 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| May 12, 2000 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 30, 2000 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 30, 2000 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Apr 9, 1999 | 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. |
| Feb 1, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 29, 1998 | 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. |
| Jul 22, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 21, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |