USPTO serial 75907853
H HYUNDAI MICROELECTRONICS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WOOD, CAROLINE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - 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 H HYUNDAI MICROELECTRONICS?
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.
Susan Upton Douglass
SUSAN UPTON DOUGLASS FROSS ZELNICK LEHRMAN & ZISSU PC866 UNITED NATIONS PLZNEW YORK, NY 10017UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | semiconductor processor chips; integrated circuits; semiconductor memory device; microprocessors; printed circuit boards; multimedia accelerator; micro controller; TFT-LCD panel; liquid crystal display monitor; plasma display monitor | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 14, 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. |
| Nov 12, 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. |
| Apr 11, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 11, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 4, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 23, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 24, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 24, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 24, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 14, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 31, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 17, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 28, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 28, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 8, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 27, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 27, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 6, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 26, 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. |
| Aug 9, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 30, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |