USPTO serial 75781957
THE GREEN LINE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DALIER, LAURIEL
- 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 THE GREEN LINE?
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.
STEPHEN J HOLMES
STEPHEN J HOLMES BARLOW JOSEPHS & HOLMES101 DYER ST FL 5PROVIDENCE, RI 02903-3908UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | METAL-BASED INDUSTRIAL MATERIALS, NAMELY, LEAD-FREE SOLDER AND LEAD-FREE SOLDER ALLOYS FOR USE IN INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS, NAMELY, MANUFACTURE AND PROCESSING OF PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARDS AND OTHER ELECTRONIC SUBSTRATES | ACTIVE | — |
| 007 | HIGH-PERFORMANCE MACHINERY AND SYSTEMS FOR ELECTRONICS APPLICATIONS EMPLOYING LEAD-FREE MATERIALS TO MANUFACTURE LEAD-FREE PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARDS AND OTHER ELECTRONIC SUBSTRATES, NAMELY, MATERIALS DISPENSING MACHINES, STENCIL PRINTING MACHINES, FLUXING MACHINES, REFLOW SOLDERING MACHINES, WAVE-SOLDERING MACHINES, AND FLUX REMOVAL/CLEANING MACHINES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 31, 2002 | 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 10, 2001 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Aug 28, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 27, 2001 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 27, 2001 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 15, 2001 | 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. |
| Oct 4, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 20, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 20, 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. |
| Nov 30, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |