USPTO serial 76528090
EPOS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FROMM, MARTHA L
- 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 EPOS?
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
2282 AG Rijswijk, NL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
ARTHUR S GARRETT
ARTHUR S GARRETT FINNEGAN HENDERSON FARABOW GARRETT ET AL901 NEW YORK AVE NWWASHINGTON, DC 20001-4413UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | Common metals and their alloys, metal building materials; transportable buildings of metal; non-electric cables and wires of common metal; ironmongery, small items of metal hardware; metallic pipes and tubes; safes; goods of common metal, metal fittings for furniture | ACTIVE | — |
| 009 | Switching cabinets and fuse boxes and parts thereof, namely, fittings and cover housings for electric collector bars | ACTIVE | — |
| 020 | Furniture, fittings for furniture; not of metal | 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 13, 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. |
| Jul 12, 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. |
| Dec 14, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 2, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 2, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 1, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 12, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 12, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 15, 2003 | 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 9, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |