USPTO serial 76298322
PEMCO AEROPLEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- AMOS, TANYA L
- 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 PEMCO AEROPLEX?
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.
Christine R. Strong
CHRISTINE R STRONG MAYNARD, COOPER & GALE, PC1901 SIXTH AVE N2400 AM SOUTH/HARBERT PLZBIRMINGHAM, AL 35203Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 037 | maintenance and/or repair of large transport commercial and military aircraft | ACTIVE | Sep 1, 1988 |
| 040 | modification of large transport commercial and military aircraft, namely, conversion of passenger aircraft to freighters and other cargo aircraft | ACTIVE | Sep 1, 1988 |
| 042 | engineering services related to maintaining, repairing, and modifying large transport commercial and military aircraft | ACTIVE | Sep 1, 1988 |
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 17, 2004 | 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. |
| Nov 5, 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 3, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 10, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 29, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 26, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 25, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 11, 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. |
| Sep 25, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 24, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |