Drawing for CODON BASED SYNTHESIS

USPTO serial 75910733

CODON BASED SYNTHESIS

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 603
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
GRIFFIN, JAMES
Law office
FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)

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 CODON BASED SYNTHESIS?

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.

Cathryn A Campbell

CATHRYN A CAMPBELL CAMPBELL & FLORES4370 LA JOLLA VILLAGE DRSAN DIEGO, CA 92122UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
042Research activities directed toward the molecular engineering of compounds for use in therapeutics, diagnostics, agricultural products, enzymes, chemical products, nutritional products, food additives and industrial applications, including but not limited to, commodity and specialty chemicalsACTIVE—

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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Sep 26, 2002JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Sep 26, 2002EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Jun 12, 2002ABN3ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Jun 12, 2002EXPAEX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED—
Mar 28, 2002CNESEXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED—
Jan 30, 2002JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Dec 13, 2001EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Dec 13, 2001EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Apr 25, 2001CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA 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 26, 2001CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jul 27, 2000CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
Jul 13, 2000DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance