USPTO serial 76286311
SPINNER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHARPER JR, SAM
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 SPINNER?
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.
Ellsworth R. Roston
ELLSWORTH R ROSTON FULWIDER, PATTON, LEE & UTECHT, LLP6060 CTR DRTENTH FLLOS ANGELES, CA 90045Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | ELECTRICALLY DRIVEN ROTARY HAIR BRUSHES AND ELECTRICAL CURLING IRONS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 29, 2005 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Jun 29, 2005 | 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. |
| Dec 1, 2004 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Dec 1, 2004 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 24, 2004 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Sep 28, 2004 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 28, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 18, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 18, 2004 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Feb 19, 2004 | 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. |
| Dec 8, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 22, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 27, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 27, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 23, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 18, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 6, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 6, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 14, 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. |
| Jun 24, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 26, 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. |
| Mar 22, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |