USPTO serial 76377541
MTC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ELTON, DAVID JONATHAN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - 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 MTC?
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.
GEORGE W. LEWIS
GEORGE W LEWIS JACOBSON HOLMAN PLLC400 SEVENTH ST N WWASHINGTON, DC 20004-2201UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | machine tools, namely, metal working machining centers, metal working turning centers, metal working universal machines, metal working milling machines, metal working boring machines, metal working lathes, metal working grinding machines and metal working multiple machine tools; cutting tools, namely, cutting bits for metal working machines and milling cutters; machine tool holders | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 15, 2011 | 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. |
| Jul 15, 2011 | 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. |
| Dec 15, 2010 | 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. |
| Dec 14, 2010 | CNFR | SU - 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. |
| Nov 23, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 22, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 22, 2010 | 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 1, 2010 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| May 20, 2010 | 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. |
| May 20, 2010 | CNRT | SU - 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. |
| Apr 28, 2010 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Apr 28, 2010 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Apr 26, 2010 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Apr 26, 2010 | EISU | TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED | The applicant filed a Statement of Use with specimens showing the mark in actual commerce. The USPTO will review the filing for compliance. If accepted, the mark can proceed to registration; if deficient, the USPTO may issue a requirement or office action. |
| Dec 1, 2009 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Sep 8, 2009 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Aug 19, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 4, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 27, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 5, 2007 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2007 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2007 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 2, 2007 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 8, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 7, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 7, 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. |
| Aug 7, 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. |
| Aug 7, 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. |
| Aug 20, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 18, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 17, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 17, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 17, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Aug 17, 2005 | 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. |
| Feb 17, 2005 | 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. |
| Feb 17, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 6, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 6, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 21, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 21, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 28, 2004 | 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. |
| Jul 30, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 20, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 23, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 3, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 3, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 18, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 3, 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. |
| May 30, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 13, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 26, 2002 | AMPX | PRELIMINARY/VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| Mar 26, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |