USPTO serial 76155141
POWER TRAC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- VANSTON, KATHY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with POWER TRAC?
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.
Erik W Ibele
ERIK W IBELE NEIDER BOUCHER SC440 SCIENCE DR STE 300MADISON, WI 53711UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 012 | Vehicle battery charge monitor | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 20, 2006 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Oct 20, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 18, 2006 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Oct 18, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jul 20, 2006 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Dec 22, 2005 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Dec 22, 2005 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 10, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 19, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 15, 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 15, 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. |
| Feb 4, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Oct 27, 2004 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Oct 27, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 27, 2004 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Mar 31, 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. |
| Feb 2, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Dec 5, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 5, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 3, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 27, 2003 | 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. |
| Apr 4, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 15, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 30, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |