USPTO serial 76114680
BECKER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PINO, BRIAN
- 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 BECKER?
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.
ROBERT P. HART
ROBERT P HART HARMAN INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIES INC8500 BALBOA BLVDNORTHRIDGE, CA 91329UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Electro-mechanical and electronic signaling and warning apparatus, namely, radar detectors; car telephones, video telephones and fax machines | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Harman International Industries, Incorporated
- Other trademarks owned by Harman International Industries, Incorporated
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Similar marks named BECKER
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 26, 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 26, 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. |
| Mar 28, 2005 | 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 28, 2005 | CNRT | SU - NON-FINAL ACTION - WRITTEN | 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 19, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 1, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 1, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 22, 2004 | SPRA | SU - PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | — |
| Dec 22, 2004 | SPRA | SU - PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 16, 2004 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Dec 2, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Dec 2, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 26, 2004 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| May 5, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 29, 2004 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Apr 29, 2004 | 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. |
| Jan 6, 2004 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 6, 2004 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2004 | 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. |
| Jul 17, 2003 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 25, 2003 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 25, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 1, 2003 | 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. |
| Jan 7, 2003 | 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. |
| Dec 18, 2002 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 7, 2002 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Nov 6, 2002 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 25, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 24, 2002 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 31, 2002 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jul 3, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 20, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 20, 2002 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 19, 2002 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 13, 2002 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Apr 30, 2002 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 18, 2002 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 11, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 1, 2001 | 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. |
| Jul 2, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 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. |
| Feb 7, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |