USPTO serial 76321531
INVISIBLE FIELD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RAUEN, JAMES
- 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 INVISIBLE FIELD?
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.
Thomas E. Anderson
THOMAS E ANDERSON GIFFORD KRASS GROH SPRINKLE ET AL280 N OLD WOODWARD AVE STE 400BIRMINGHAM, MI 48009-5394UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Presence sensing equipment, namely, proximity sensors for use with fence, gate, barrier or door access control and associated control systems | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 22, 2004 | PC.D | PETITION TO DIRECTOR DISMISSED | — |
| Oct 2, 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. |
| Sep 24, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 9, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Sep 9, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Sep 5, 2003 | PCRC | PETITION TO DIRECTOR RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 5, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 13, 2003 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Mar 4, 2003 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Feb 28, 2003 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Feb 21, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 2, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Dec 31, 2002 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Dec 16, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 13, 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. |
| Apr 18, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 18, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 4, 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. |
| Dec 20, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |