USPTO serial 76396650
SILICON BIOTECHNOLOGY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FICKES, JERI J
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 107 - 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 SILICON BIOTECHNOLOGY?
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.
Susan Somers Neal
SUSAN NEAL NEAL & MCDEVITT LLC1776 ASH STNORTHFIELD, IL 60093UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | technical consultation, research and development in the fields of gene discovery, functional genomics, protein and enzyme production and recovery systems, molecular evolution and design, human immunology, metabolic pathway engineering, and formulation delivery systems, for the health care, agriculture, industrial chemicals, cleaning products, textile processing, grain processing, food, feed, personal care, and pharmaceutical industries, among others; genetic and protein engineering services; scientific research services; design and testing of new biotechnology health care, agricultural and industrial chemicals products; immunobiological research and testing | ACTIVE | Sep 1, 2003 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 14, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 14, 2006 | 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. |
| Jul 19, 2005 | GNSF | SUBSEQUENT FINAL EMAILED | — |
| Jul 19, 2005 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 24, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 24, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 26, 2004 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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. |
| Nov 26, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 19, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 14, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 14, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 8, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 10, 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. |
| Feb 2, 2004 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Dec 9, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 10, 2003 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 10, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 1, 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. |
| Mar 25, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 24, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 24, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 17, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 23, 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. |
| Aug 21, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 3, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |