USPTO serial 76158580
AIRFLEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- AXILBUND, MELVIN
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 AIRFLEX?
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.
Paul A Keller
PAUL A KELLER HARNESS DICKEY & PIERCEP O BOX 828BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48303-0828UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 020 | Motorized lumbar massage system sold as a component part of chairs, sofas, and loveseats and sold exclusively through authorized dealerships | ACTIVE | Feb 19, 2001 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 27, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 25, 2003 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Nov 12, 2002 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Nov 8, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 7, 2002 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Nov 7, 2002 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Oct 22, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 22, 2002 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Oct 2, 2002 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jul 11, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 30, 2002 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Nov 29, 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. |
| Sep 21, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 21, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 28, 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. |
| Jun 21, 2001 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Jun 13, 2001 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Mar 22, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 22, 2001 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Mar 16, 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. |
| Mar 2, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |