USPTO serial 75461079
MARINE VISION SYSTEMS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RAUEN, JAMES
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with MARINE VISION SYSTEMS?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Thomas B. Luebbering
THOMAS B LUEBBERING HOVEY WILLIAMS LLP2405 GRAND BLVD STE 400KANSAS CITY, MO 64108UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Sunglasses, sunglass cases, related sunglass products namely, retainers and headstraps | ACTIVE | Nov 1, 1995 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 3, 2004 | 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. |
| Apr 29, 2003 | 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. |
| Jan 14, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 10, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 10, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 10, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 19, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 29, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 29, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 15, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 27, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 27, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 2, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 1, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 30, 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. |
| Dec 23, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 2, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 30, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 24, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |