USPTO serial 76320405
SECURECOCKPIT.COM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BORSUK, ESTHER
- 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 SECURECOCKPIT.COM?
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
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
FRANK L KUBLER
13261 SW 54TH CTMIRAMAR, FL 33027-5434UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 020 | product is such as to the cockpit door of transport category aircraft to secure the cockpit from unwanted entry | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 25, 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. |
| Mar 11, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 28, 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. |
| Jan 13, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Dec 8, 2003 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Dec 8, 2003 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 7, 2003 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 11, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 13, 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. |
| Aug 27, 2002 | 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. |
| Jul 5, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 5, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 27, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 28, 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. |
| Dec 18, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |