USPTO serial 76075971
HERCULIT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- OH, WON TEAK
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 HERCULIT?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 019 | non-metallic building materials; non-metallic rigid drain pipes for buildings; asphalt, pitch, and bitumen; portable non-metal buildings; and non-metal monuments | ACTIVE | — |
| 020 | furniture, mirrors, picture frames; goods made wholly of partly of wood, cork, reed, cane, wicker, horn, bone, ivory, whalebone, shell, amber, mother-of-pearl, meerschaum and substitutes therefore, or of plastic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 2, 2007 | 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. |
| Jul 2, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 22, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 22, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 3, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 3, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Apr 3, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 3, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 25, 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. |
| Aug 25, 2005 | CNFR | 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. |
| Aug 9, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 1, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 22, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 17, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 10, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 3, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 3, 2001 | 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. |
| Dec 18, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 6, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |