USPTO serial 76330540
SAFETY SYSTEM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- YARD, JOHN S
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 SAFETY SYSTEM?
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.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
CHRISTOPHER B. FAGAN
CHRISTOPHER B FAGAN FAY SHARPE FAGAN MINNICH ET AL1100 SUPERIOR AVE E FL 7CLEVELAND, OH 44114-2531UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | METAL GAS CONNECTORS AND MULTI-PLANE FITTINGS THEREFOR FOR USE WITH GAS APPLIANCES; MANUALLY OPERATED METAL VALVES, NAMELY GAS VALVES AND MULTI-PLANE FITTINGS THEREFOR; QUICK DISCONNECT VALVES OF METAL AND MULTI-PLANE FITTINGS THEREFOR; MANUALLY OPERATED GAS BALL VALVES; AND METAL GAS HOSE | ACTIVE | May 17, 2002 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 30, 2008 | 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. |
| Sep 30, 2008 | 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 3, 2008 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 3, 2008 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 12, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 12, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 12, 2007 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Jun 15, 2007 | 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 15, 2007 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| May 14, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 14, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 14, 2007 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| May 14, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 20, 2007 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Apr 20, 2007 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 20, 2007 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Oct 31, 2006 | 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 31, 2006 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| Sep 23, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 16, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 16, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 15, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 14, 2006 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| Feb 14, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 22, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 9, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 9, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 14, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 9, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 11, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 9, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 13, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 14, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 14, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 25, 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. |
| Jan 18, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |