Drawing for PORTABLE TECHNOLOGY

USPTO serial 75399443

PORTABLE TECHNOLOGY

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 603
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
BENMAMAN, ALICE
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 PORTABLE TECHNOLOGY?

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.

AARON B RETZER

AARON B RETZER EPSTEIN EDELL & RETZER1901 RESEARCH BLVD STE 400ROCKVILLE, MD 20850UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
009Carrying cases for electronic equipment and computers, and security and monitoring systems for carrying cases for electronic equipment and computers, namely, cable locks, motion sensing alarms, combination locks, and notebook computer carrying cases with integral remote control security locks and alarmsACTIVE—

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
Dec 6, 2000DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Nov 30, 2000ABN3ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Nov 30, 2000JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Nov 30, 2000EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Sep 6, 2000EXFBEXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF—
Apr 27, 2000DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Apr 27, 2000CNCFCONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED—
Mar 31, 2000JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Mar 31, 2000EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Jan 19, 2000CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jul 19, 1999CNFRFINAL 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.
May 3, 1999CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Nov 2, 1998CNRTNON-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.
Sep 29, 1998DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Sep 18, 1998DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance