USPTO serial 76213128
PSYCHOSOMATIC ENERGETICS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FROMM, MARTHA L
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - 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 PSYCHOSOMATIC ENERGETICS?
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.
D.W. Sprinkle
D W SPRINKLE GIFFORD, KRASS, GROH, SPRINKLE, ANDERSON280 N OLD WOODWARD AVE STE 400BIRMINGHAM, MI 48009-5394UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 25, 2005 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Apr 12, 2005 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 30, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 29, 2004 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 29, 2004 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Oct 19, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 21, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 27, 2004 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| May 13, 2004 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 5, 2004 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 7, 2003 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jul 22, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jul 22, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 18, 2003 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jun 30, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 30, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 14, 2003 | 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. |
| Oct 1, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 1, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 28, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 6, 2002 | 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. |
| Jan 29, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 29, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 29, 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 22, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |