USPTO serial 76257176
ECO+
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LINCOSKI JR, JOHN T
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 ECO+?
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
A-8045 Graz, AT
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
David S. Abrams, Esquire
DAVID S ABRAMS ESQ ROYLANCE, ABRAMS BERDO & GOODMAN LLP1300 19TH ST NW STE 600WASHINGTON, DC 20036-1649UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | PLANTS FOR THE SURFACE TREATMENT OF STEEL STRIPS COMPRISING DECOILER, PICKLING TANK, RINSING TANK AND COILER; PLANTS FOR THE PICKLING OF STEEL STRIPS; AND PUSH PICKLING PLANTS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 8, 2003 | 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 24, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 22, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 22, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 20, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 12, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 21, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 21, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 25, 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. |
| Jan 23, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 27, 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. |
| Jul 13, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |