USPTO serial 76229796
POWER TEST
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- YARD, JOHN S
- Law office
- TTAB
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 POWER TEST?
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.
HARRIET E PERKINS
HARRIET E PERKINS DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP18TH & CHERRY STSONE LOGAN SQPHILADELPHIA, PA 19102Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 004 | Petroleum hydrocarbon fuels, lubricating greases for use with vehicles, and lubricating oils | ABANDONED | Aug 21, 1959 |
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 28, 2007 | MAB4 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Jun 28, 2007 | CU.T | CONCURRENT USE TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jun 28, 2007 | ABN4 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Mar 17, 2005 | CU.I | CONCURRENT USE PROC. INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Mar 17, 2005 | CU.I | CONCURRENT USE PROC. INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Mar 17, 2005 | CU.I | CONCURRENT USE PROC. INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Mar 17, 2005 | CU.I | CONCURRENT USE PROC. INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Mar 17, 2005 | CU.I | CONCURRENT USE PROC. INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Mar 17, 2005 | CU.I | CONCURRENT USE PROC. INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Mar 17, 2005 | CU.I | CONCURRENT USE PROC. INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Apr 22, 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. |
| Apr 2, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 27, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 27, 2003 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Oct 3, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 19, 2002 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 9, 2002 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Sep 9, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 9, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 9, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 6, 2002 | 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. |
| Dec 3, 2001 | 1.AD | SEC. 1(A) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Dec 3, 2001 | 1.BA | Sec. 1(B) CLAIM ADDED | — |
| Dec 3, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 29, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 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. |
| May 23, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |