USPTO serial 76302658
GREAT LAKES RAMCO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HWANG, JOHN C B
- 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 GREAT LAKES RAMCO?
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.
Kenneth L. Mitchell
KENNETH L MITCHELL WOODLING, KROST & RUST9213 CHILLICOTHE RDKIRTLAND, OH 44094-8500UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | BUSINESS MANAGEMENT SERVICES | ACTIVE | Aug 31, 2001 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 24, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 18, 2004 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Jun 29, 2004 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Mar 9, 2004 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Nov 24, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Nov 20, 2003 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| May 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. |
| May 6, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 22, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 21, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 21, 2003 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 29, 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. |
| Oct 24, 2002 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Oct 9, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 7, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 7, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 21, 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. |
| Apr 4, 2002 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 4, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 5, 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 28, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 28, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |