USPTO serial 76133711
LEWIS N. CLARK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BRACEY, KAREN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 LEWIS N. CLARK?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
HOWARD R. FINE
Howard R. Fine Howard R. Fine, Attorney at Law2100 Sanders Road, Suite 200Northbrook, IL 60062UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 014 | Jewelry | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 25, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 16, 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. |
| Aug 16, 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. |
| Apr 14, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 12, 2005 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 12, 2005 | CNRT | 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. |
| Oct 28, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 22, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 1, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 1, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 9, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 14, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 9, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 23, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 15, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 11, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 10, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 13, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 12, 2001 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Mar 28, 2001 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 23, 2001 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 16, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |