USPTO serial 76545496
BROADBEAM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ZAK, HENRY
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - 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 BROADBEAM?
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
Pointe Claire, Quebec, CA
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 PLLCTHE JENIFER BUILDING400 SEVENTH STREET, N.W.WASHINGTON, DC 20004-2201Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | FLOODLIGHTS FOR NONRESIDENTIAL AND OUTDOOR USE | ACTIVE | Aug 31, 2006 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 20, 2010 | 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. |
| Jan 20, 2010 | 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 24, 2009 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Jun 24, 2009 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Jun 24, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 17, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 17, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 17, 2009 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 8, 2009 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Jan 8, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 8, 2009 | 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 8, 2009 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Dec 10, 2008 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Dec 10, 2008 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Dec 9, 2008 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 9, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 9, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 9, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 8, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 8, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 4, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 4, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 3, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 3, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 3, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 21, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 22, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 22, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 22, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 20, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 12, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 11, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 11, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 25, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 25, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 3, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 3, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 28, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 3, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 3, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 8, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 8, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 8, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 8, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 28, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 9, 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. |
| Mar 3, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |