USPTO serial 76112521
THE AEROSPACE POWER COMPANY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MILTON, PRISCILLA
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 THE AEROSPACE POWER COMPANY?
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.
Stephen G. Mican
STEPHEN G MICAN HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND CORPORATION4747 HARRISON AVEROCKFORD, IL 61108-7929UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 037 | Repair, maintenance and support of aerospace components, namely actuators, pumps, turbines, generators, motors, gearboxes, constant speed drives, integral drive generators, electric power controllers and electric power distribution assemblies; and subsystems, namely, actuator systems, electric power generation systems, auxiliary power systems, emergency power systems and power distribution systems | ACTIVE | Jul 18, 2000 |
| 040 | manufacture of aerospace components, namely actuators, pumps, turbines, generators, motors, gear boxes, constant speed drives, integral drive generators, electric power controllers and electric power distribution assemblies and subsystems, comprised of actuator systems, electric power generation systems, auxiliary power systems, emergency power systems and power distribution systems, for building of aircraft | ACTIVE | Jul 18, 2000 |
| 042 | design of aerospace components and subsystems for building of aircraft | ACTIVE | Jul 18, 2000 |
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.
- Other trademarks owned by Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation
- Other trademarks in Class 037
- Other trademarks in Class 040
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named THE AEROSPACE POWER COMPANY
- Prosecution event ABN2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 25, 2004 | 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 16, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 16, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 24, 2003 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Aug 26, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 20, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 20, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 30, 2003 | 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. |
| Oct 2, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 12, 2002 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Nov 7, 2001 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 2, 2001 | 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 10, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 5, 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. |
| Jan 30, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |