USPTO serial 75667023
SHUTTLE EXPRESS, INC.
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WILLIS, PAMELA Y
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 SHUTTLE EXPRESS, INC.?
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.
Elizabeth R. Holohan
ELIZABETH R HOLOHAN MILLER, NASH, WIENER, HAGER & CARLSEN4400 TWO UNION SQ BLDG601 UNION STSEATTLE, WA 98101Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 039 | TRANSPORTATION OF PASSENGERS BETWEEN HOMES, OFFICES, HOTELS, AND AIRPORTS BY MEANS OF SHUTTLE BUSES | ACTIVE | Oct 1, 1987 |
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 6, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Oct 6, 2006 | MAB1 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - EXPRESS ABANDONMENT | — |
| Oct 6, 2006 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Sep 27, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 13, 2006 | EXAR | TEAS EXPRESS ABANDONMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 9, 2004 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Mar 2, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 2, 2004 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Aug 29, 2003 | 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. |
| May 2, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 2, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 8, 2002 | 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. |
| Apr 11, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 17, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 17, 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. |
| Sep 10, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |