Drawing for MICROFORCE

USPTO serial 76463401

MICROFORCE

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 606
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
STOIDES, KATHERINE
Law office
INTENT TO USE SECTION

What this means

This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.

Need help with MICROFORCE?

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 C. Larkin

CHRISTOPHER C LARKIN SEYFARTH SHAW2029 CENTURY PARK E STE 3300LOS ANGELES, CA 90067-3063UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
009wafer probe cards, space transformers, probe heads, printed circuit boards, interposers, and interconnection elements and tips thereforACTIVE—

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

Latest event (MAB6): The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window.

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Jan 16, 2008MAB6ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window.
Jan 16, 2008ABN6ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window.
Jan 8, 2008DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Jan 9, 2007EX5GSOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED—
Nov 13, 2006MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Nov 9, 2006EXT5SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED—
Jun 2, 2006EX4GSOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED—
May 10, 2006MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
May 8, 2006EXT4SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED—
Dec 7, 2005EX3GSOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED—
Nov 15, 2005MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Nov 9, 2005EXT3SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED—
Jun 1, 2005EX2GSOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED—
May 12, 2005MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
May 10, 2005EXT2SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED—
Mar 25, 2005DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Nov 8, 2004EX1GSOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED—
Nov 8, 2004EXT1SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED—
Nov 8, 2004MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Sep 1, 2004CFITCASE FILE IN TICRS—
May 11, 2004NOAMNOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANTA 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.
Feb 17, 2004PUBOPUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITIONYour 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.
Jan 28, 2004NPUBNOTICE OF PUBLICATION—
Dec 12, 2003CNSAAPPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER—
Sep 25, 2003CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Sep 25, 2003MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Mar 25, 2003CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
Mar 17, 2003DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance