USPTO serial 75665369
MAE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BRYAN JOHNSON, HELLEN
- 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 MAE?
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.
Barbara H. Loewenthal
BARBARA H LOEWENTHAL GOTTLIEB RACKMAN & REISMAN, PC270 MADISON AVENEW YORK, NY 10016-0601UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | ELECTRIC LIGHT DIMMERS AND LIGHT SWITCHING | ACTIVE | — |
| 011 | Aquarium lights; automobile lights; anti-dazzle devices, namely anti-dazzle light cover and shades; ceiling lights; curling lamps; light diffusers, namely light covers an shades that diffuse light; electric discharge tubes; electric lamps, filaments for electric lamps; magnesium filaments; energy saving bulbs and tubes; flashlights, torches; lamp casings, lamp glasses, lamp globes, lamp reflectors; lanterns; light bulbs; lighting apparatus, namely luminous tubes, lamps, lamp glasses, lamp casing, lamp globes, and lamp reflectors, pocket search lights, lights for vehicles, oil lamps, projector lamps, street lamps; luminous tube; ultra-violet lamps not for use in the medical field; luminous tubes | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 10, 2003 | 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. |
| Oct 9, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 5, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 20, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 20, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 15, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 14, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 12, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 30, 2000 | 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. |
| Feb 15, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 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 10, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |