USPTO serial 76042667
LENTIKAT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LEVINE, HOWARD B
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 LENTIKAT?
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.
Beth M. Goldman
BETH M GOLDMAN HELLER EHRMAN WHITE & MCAULIFFE LLP333 BUSH STSAN FRANCISCO, CA 94104-2878UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | Viral system, namely, retroviral vectors and packaging cells for therapeutic and clinical use for the treatment of cancer, autoimmune diseases, inflammatory diseases, and genetic diseases | ACTIVE | Mar 25, 2002 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 17, 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. |
| Oct 17, 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. |
| Feb 8, 2005 | 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. |
| Feb 8, 2005 | CNFR | SU - FINAL REFUSAL - WRITTEN | 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. |
| Dec 8, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 18, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 18, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 14, 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 22, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 19, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 11, 2004 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Feb 20, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2004 | 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. |
| Aug 27, 2003 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 20, 2003 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Aug 20, 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. |
| Apr 10, 2003 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 6, 2003 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Feb 6, 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 20, 2002 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 26, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 20, 2002 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| May 28, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 11, 2002 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 20, 2002 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 21, 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. |
| May 29, 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 16, 2001 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 27, 2000 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 27, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |