USPTO serial 75803812
ETOUCH
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHISOLM, KEVON
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 ETOUCH?
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.
Kevin P. Steinman
KEVIN P STEINMAN LADAS & PARRY5670 WILSHIRE BLVD STE 2100LOS ANGELES, CA 90036-5679UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Electronic displays, namely, computer displays and monitors, all having touch screen capabilities | 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 22, 2005 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Feb 16, 2005 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 16, 2005 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Oct 6, 2004 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Oct 6, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 6, 2004 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Jun 10, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 7, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 5, 2004 | 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. |
| Mar 5, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 1, 2004 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 9, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 1, 2003 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2003 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 3, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| May 2, 2003 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Nov 14, 2002 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Nov 13, 2002 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Apr 25, 2002 | 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. |
| Jan 24, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 29, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 29, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 22, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 22, 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. |
| Mar 15, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 15, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 8, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |