USPTO serial 76532163
SAF-T-LITE RADIATION PROTECTOR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ENGEL, MICHAEL
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 107 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 SAF-T-LITE RADIATION PROTECTOR?
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.
Richard M. Saccocio
RICHARD M SACCOCIO RICHARD M SACCOCIO PA100 SE 12TH STFT LAUDERDALE, FL 33316-1814UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Safety products, namely radiation shielding and protection products namely portable and non-portable radiation shielding, comprising laminated leaded glass panels and panes | ACTIVE | May 1, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 27, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jun 18, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 20, 2007 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 20, 2007 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Dec 5, 2006 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| Oct 24, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 24, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 25, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jul 6, 2006 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Sep 13, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 12, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 12, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Sep 12, 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. |
| Sep 12, 2005 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 12, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Sep 12, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jul 12, 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. |
| Jun 1, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 31, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 21, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 8, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 7, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | 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, 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. |
| Dec 11, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 26, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 26, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 13, 2004 | 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. |
| Jun 28, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 23, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 23, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 23, 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 | — |