USPTO serial 76551438
VARIBUS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KIM, SOPHIA SUJIN
- 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 VARIBUS?
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
571 34 NASSJO, SE
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Switching cabinets and parts thereof, namely fittings and cover housings for electric connector bars | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 5, 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. |
| Sep 2, 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. |
| Jan 24, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 21, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 14, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 27, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 16, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 15, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 8, 2004 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 8, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 27, 2004 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Aug 18, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 17, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 4, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 4, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 11, 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. |
| May 2, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |