USPTO serial 75876635
EMASTER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ANKRAH, NAAKWAMA S
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 EMASTER?
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.
DAVID W LEE
NEVILLE LIN POWERMAX BATTERY (U.S.A.) INC11750 JERSEY BLVDRANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | ELECTRIC WIRES AND CABLES, POWER CABLES, HOUSEHOLD ELECTRIC APPLIANCES, NAMELY, ELECTRIC SHAVERS, BUZZERS | ACTIVE | Aug 1, 2003 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 2005 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Mar 7, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 19, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 9, 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. |
| Aug 7, 2004 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Jun 25, 2004 | CNPR | ALLOWED PRINCIPAL REGISTER - SOU ACCEPTED | — |
| May 13, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 6, 2004 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Apr 29, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 25, 2004 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Mar 25, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 17, 2004 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Nov 20, 2003 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Nov 20, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 20, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 27, 2003 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Oct 14, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 10, 2003 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 1, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 8, 2003 | EISU | TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED | The applicant filed a Statement of Use with specimens showing the mark in actual commerce. The USPTO will review the filing for compliance. If accepted, the mark can proceed to registration; if deficient, the USPTO may issue a requirement or office action. |
| Sep 4, 2003 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| May 8, 2003 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 4, 2003 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Mar 4, 2003 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Sep 24, 2002 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 4, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 29, 2002 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2002 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 8, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 4, 2002 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 4, 2001 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Jun 12, 2001 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| May 30, 2001 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 14, 2001 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 22, 2001 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Nov 17, 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. |
| May 8, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |