USPTO serial 75622879
COLOR LOCK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WILLIAMS, IRENE
- 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 COLOR LOCK?
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
Pittsburgh, PA
MIDDLETOWN, OH
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
KAREN K. GAUNT
KAREN K GAUNT FROST & JACOBS LLP2500 PNC CTR201 E 5TH STCINCINNATI, OH 45202Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | painted metal building products, namely, pre-painted stainless steel used for roof panels, soffits, gutters, fascias, and specialty accent details | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 24, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 5, 2002 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 5, 2002 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Dec 16, 2001 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 21, 2001 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jun 5, 2001 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 5, 2001 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Dec 5, 2000 | 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. |
| Aug 7, 2000 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 17, 2000 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 2, 2000 | 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. |
| Jul 12, 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. |
| Jul 1, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |